Transverse uterine incision non-closure versus closure

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorGül, A
dc.contributor.authorKotan, Ç
dc.contributor.authorUgras, S
dc.contributor.authorAlan, M
dc.contributor.authorGül, T
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-24T16:18:51Z
dc.date.available2024-04-24T16:18:51Z
dc.date.issued2000
dc.departmentDicle Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractThis study was conducted to test the hypothesis that non-closure of all layers of the uterus during low transverse cesarean section is not associated with increased intra-operative or immediate and late postoperative complication. Eleven pregnant dogs underwent cesarean section for the evaluation of non-closure and closure of all layers of the uterus on immediate or early and late postoperative complication and the effect of suture in tissue. Statistical analysis was performed using Student's t-test for continuous variables and analysis for qualitative variables. Significance was defined as P < 0.05. The ranges of wound infection, other morbidity, and mortality were similar between the groups. The average operating time was significantly less for the non-closure group (71.00 +/- 7.11 min) than for the closure group (92.00 +/- 6.12 min; P < 0.005). Adhesion was significantly less (P < 0.001) for the non-closure group than for the closure group. The ranges of myometrial necrosis (5/5: 100% versus 0/5: 00%; P < 0.001) and fibrosis (2/5. 40% versus 0/5: 00%; P < 0.01) were significantly higher for the closure group than for the open group. It was found that non-closure of all layers of the uterus at low transverse cesarean incision had no adverse effect on immediate and late postoperative complication in dogs. Our data show that non-closure of all layers of the uterus at low transverse cesarean incision results in significantly less muscular necrosis and fibrosis than in the closure group. We suggest that non-closure and/or at least non-vigorous locking bur very simple closure of all layers of the uterus at low transverse cesarean incision may be preferential in appropriate cases. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0301-2115(99)00118-9
dc.identifier.endpage99en_US
dc.identifier.issn0301-2115
dc.identifier.issn1872-7654
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.pmid10659925
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-0343048386
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ2
dc.identifier.startpage95en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-2115(99)00118-9
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11468/16305
dc.identifier.volume88en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000084033300017
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Science Bven_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectCesarean Incisionen_US
dc.subjectNon-Closureen_US
dc.subjectClosureen_US
dc.subjectDogsen_US
dc.titleTransverse uterine incision non-closure versus closureen_US
dc.titleTransverse uterine incision non-closure versus closure
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu