Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorYilmaz Baran, Safak
dc.contributor.authorKalayci, Hakan
dc.contributor.authorDogan Durdag, Gulsen
dc.contributor.authorYetkinel, Selcuk
dc.contributor.authorAlemdaroglu, Songul
dc.contributor.authorCok, Tayfun
dc.contributor.authorBulgan Kilicdag, Esra
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-19T12:02:25Z
dc.date.available2021-04-19T12:02:25Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn0001-6349en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11727/5749
dc.description.abstractIntroduction Cesarean deliveries are commonly performed throughout the world. Although the uterine closure technique following this procedure may influence how the uterine scar heals, there is insufficient evidence for choosing the appropriate technique and so preventing long-term negative consequences. This prospective, randomized study examined the effects of single- and double-layer uterine closure techniques on uterine scar healing following cesarean delivery. Material and methods This study assessed a total of 282 women aged 18-45 years who were in gestational weeks 24-41 of singleton pregnancies. None had previously undergone uterine surgeries. These participants completed their first cesarean deliveries at the time of study and were randomized into the following two treatment groups: single-layer closure with locking and double-layer closure with locking in the first layer, but not in the second layer (NCT03629028). However, the decidua was not included for treatment in either group. Participants were evaluated at 6-9 months after cesarean section by saline infusion sonohysterography to assess cesarean delivery scar defects. These procedures were conducted by experienced sonographers who were not aware of the uterine closure technique. Results Of the 225 final participants, 109 received the single-layer closure technique, whereas 116 received the double-layer technique. The niche rates were 37% (n = 40) for the single-layer group and 45.7% (n = 53) for the double-layer group (P = .22, relative risk 1.4, 95% CI = 0.8-4.4). Conclusions The single- and double-layer closure techniques did not produce different impacts on uterine scar niche development.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1111/aogs.14018en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectcesarean deliveryen_US
dc.subjectsurgical techniquesen_US
dc.subjectultrasounden_US
dc.subjectuterine closure techniquesen_US
dc.subjectuterine scaren_US
dc.titleSingle- or double-layer uterine closure techniques following cesarean: A randomized trialen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICAen_US
dc.identifier.volume100en_US
dc.identifier.issue3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage531en_US
dc.identifier.endpage537en_US
dc.identifier.wos000583310500001en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85094669432en_US
dc.contributor.pubmedID33029804en_US
dc.contributor.orcID0000-0002-5064-5267en_US
dc.contributor.orcID0000-0002-2165-9168en_US
dc.contributor.orcID0000-0003-4335-6659en_US
dc.contributor.orcID0000-0002-0942-9108en_US
dc.contributor.orcID0000-0002-7854-2921en_US
dc.contributor.orcID0000-0001-5874-7324en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergien_US
dc.contributor.researcherIDAAI-9594-2021en_US
dc.contributor.researcherIDAAL-1530-2021en_US
dc.contributor.researcherIDAAI-8400-2021en_US
dc.contributor.researcherIDAAK-8872-2021en_US
dc.contributor.researcherIDA-8208-2008en_US
dc.contributor.researcherIDABF-6439-2020en_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster