OBJECTIVE: To compare two different blunt extension techniques of the lower segment transverse uterine incision at cesarean delivery in women with a uterine scar of previous cesarean delivery.
METHODS: Study design: Prospective single-blinded parallel multi-center randomized controlled trial involving 392 cases equally divided into two groups. Group one had their incision extended transversely, while group two had their incision extended longitudinally.
METHODS: The primary outcome was the unintended extension of the uterine incision, while the secondary outcomes included the need for additional stitches to achieve hemostasis, the drop in hemoglobin level, uterine vessels injury, and the need for blood transfusion.
RESULTS: No significant difference between the transverse and longitudinal extension of the uterine incision during cesarean section as regards unintended uterine extension (P = 0.860), uterine vessel injury (P = 0.501), and cases requiring blood transfusion (P = 0.814). Significantly lower drop in hemoglobin level (P ≤ 0.001) and significantly less need for additional stitches (P ≤ 0.001) in cases with the longitudinal extension of uterine incision.
CONCLUSIONS: In women with a uterine scar of previous cesarean delivery, the blunt longitudinal extension of the uterine incision in the lower segment cesarean section didn\'t differ from the blunt transverse extension as regards unintended uterine extension but is associated with less hemoglobin drop and less need for additional stitches as compared to transverse extension of the incision. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term complications of both techniques.

OBJECTIVE: Morbidly adherent placenta (MAP) is one of leading causes of maternal mortality, with an increasing rate because of repeated cesarean sections (CS). The primary objective of this study is to compare two techniques of skin and uterine incisions in patients with MAP, evaluating the maternal fetal impact of the two methods. Retrospective multicentric cohort study.
METHODS: A total of 116 women with MAP diagnosis were enrolled and divided in two groups. Group one, comprised of 81 patients, abdominal entry was performed by Pfannenstiel skin incision plus an upper transverse lower uterine segment (LUS) incision (transverse-transverse), which was 2-3 cm above the MAP border, with the uterus in the abdomen. In group two, comprised of 35 patients, abdominal entry was performed by an infra-umbilical midline abdominal incision, by vertical-vertical technique, and the pregnant uterus was incised by a midline incision (vertical) from the fundus till the border of the MAP. Total surgery time, blood loss, blood product consumption, total hospital stay, cosmetic outcomes, and postoperative complications were investigated.
RESULTS: Total time of surgery was significantly shorter in group 1 (p < 0.05). Intraoperative blood loss was higher in group 2. Difference between preoperative and postoperative Hb and Htc levels were 3.30 ± 1.04 and 12.99 ± 5.07 respectively (p = 0.012; p = 0.033). The use of erythrocyte suspension (ES), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and cryoprecipitate and thrombocyte suspension (TS) were found to be significantly lower in patients of group 1than vertical-vertical group (p = 0.008, p = 0.009, p = 0.001, p = 0.001, respectively). There was no difference in terms of total length of hospital stay between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In a subgroup of patients diagnosed for MAP, the transverse-transverse incision resulted in less bleeding, less blood and blood product use, and had better cosmetic results than vertical-vertical incision. Moreover, the total time of surgery, crucial for MAP patients, seems to be shorter also in transverse-transverse incision than in vertical-vertical incision.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare two techniques (External pop-out versus classic technique) for delivery of the fetal head during elective cesarean section (CS).The potential clinical predictors associated with unintended uterine incision extension during fetal head delivery among women delivered by elective CS were also assessed.
METHODS: A randomized clinical trial conducted at a tertiary University hospital between February 2017 and January 2019. Participants were randomly assigned to the classic head delivery technique (group I) or external Pop-out (EPO) technique (group II). The primary outcome was the incidence of unintended uterine incision extension during elective CS. A logistic regression model was utilized to examine the association between patient\'s characteristics and the occurrence of unintended uterine incision extension.
RESULTS: Participants in both groups (455 women in each group) had similar demographic characteristics. The EPO group had a significantly lower incidence of uterine incision extension than the classic group (p = 0.006). The operative time was significantly shorter in the EPO group (p = 0.000), which was also significantly easier than the classic technique (p = 0.001). The high body mass index (p = 0.004), previous delivery by CS (p = 0.010), high birth weight (p = 0.001) and the classic technique for head delivery (p = 0.002) were significant predictors for uterine incision tears.
CONCLUSIONS: EPO technique is an easy technique for fetal head delivery during elective CS with a lower risk of uterine incision extension and shorter operative time.

UNASSIGNED: The current study aims to compare the rate of intraoperative nausea and vomiting after repeat cesarean delivery (CD) under two different approaches: by intraperitoneal incision repair or by uterus exteriorization for incision reapair.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a single-blinded randomized clinical trial (NCT03009994) at a tertiary University Hospital between the 1st of September 2016 and the 31st of December 2017. The study included pregnant women at term of gestation (>37 weeks) scheduled for repeat CD under spinal anesthesia. Women were assigned to either uterine exteriorization for incision repair (Group I) or intraperitoneal incision repair (Group II). The primary assessed was the rate of nausea and vomiting during CD.
UNASSIGNED: The study included 1028 women in the final analysis. The rate of intraoperative nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in the intraperitoneal repair group compared to the exteriorization group (24% versus 38.7%, p= 0.001). Likewise, occurrence of uterine atony and the need for additional uterotonics were significantly lower in the intraperitoneal repair group (p= 0.001 and 0.02 respectively). Postoperatively, the rate of nausea and vomiting (12.6 % versus 21 %; P=0.001), and the time to the first recognized bowel movement (12.3 hours versus 14.1 hours; P=0.003) were significantly lower in the intraperitoneal repair group compared to the exteriorization group.
UNASSIGNED: Intraperitoneal repair of the uterine incision during repeat CD is beneficial compared to exteriorization. Improvements in the rate of intra- and postoperative nausea, vomiting, uterine atony and time to the first recognized bowel movement were observed in patients operated with this technique.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two techniques of uterine incision expansion (cephalad-caudad vs. transverse) during Caesarean section (CS).
METHODS: A total of 839 patients were randomized to either a cephalad-caudad blunt expansion of uterine incision during CS versus a transverse (lateral-lateral) expansion. The primary outcome was blood loss, measured with the descent of hemoglobin level. Secondary outcomes were the need for blood transfusion and the number of surgical or postoperative complications presented in both groups.
RESULTS: There was no statistical difference with regard to decrease in hemoglobin level, but there was a higher number of surgical complications in the transverse expansion group (Cephalad-caudad: 11.53% vs. transverse: 16.42%; odds ratio [OR] 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.98; P = 0.04). There were more cases of unintended extensions of uterine incision (10.35% vs. 16.18%; OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4-0.9; P = 0.01) but no statistical difference in the number of hematomas, uterine vessel injury, or the need to transfuse.
CONCLUSIONS: The cephalad-caudad blunt expansion technique of the low transverse uterine incision is safer than the transverse expansion. There was no difference in regard to decrease in hemoglobin level, but there is a lower risk of surgical complications not associated with an increased need for blood transfusions when compared with the transverse expansion.

To evaluate whether use of the Fetal Pillow (Safe Obstetric Systems, Shenfield, UK) affects maternal and fetal morbidity in cesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation.
A randomized controlled trial was conducted at two teaching hospitals in West Bengal, India, between April 1, 2013, and March 31, 2014. Women undergoing cesarean delivery at full dilatation were enrolled and randomly assigned with computer-generated random numbers (block size 10) to undergo delivery with or without the Fetal Pillow. Group assignment was not masked. The primary outcome was the incidence of major uterine wound extensions (grade 2-3).
Overall, 120 women were assigned to each group. Major uterine wound extensions occurred in 6 (5.0%) women in the Fetal Pillow group and 39 (32.5%) in the control group (relative risk 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.11-0.48).
Use of the Fetal Pillow in second-stage cesarean delivery significantly reduces the risk of a major extension of the uterine incision. CTRI registration number: CTRI/2015/03/005651.

OBJECTIVE: To determine which type of blunt expansion of a low transverse uterine incision during operative delivery is associated with decreased blood loss and intra- and post-operative morbidity for a caesarean section (CS).
METHODS: The prospective randomised-controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bezmialem University Hospital. The patients were randomly assigned to a group that received a cephalad-caudad (n = 55) or transverse (n = 57) blunt expansion of the low transverse uterine incision. Intra- and post-operative morbidity at caesarean delivery in short-term including blood loss, operating time, post-operative pain with the faces pain rating scale, and post-operative morbidity were analysed.
RESULTS: The changes in both haemoglobin (p < 0.01) and haematocrit (p < 0.01) from the pre-operative to post-operative values, estimates of blood loss (p < 0.01) were significantly lower in cephalad-caudad group and the post-operative haematocrit concentrations (p = 0.02) were significantly greater in cephalad-caudad group when compared with the transverse group. The damage of parametrial and uterine vessels into lateral edges were recorded in 11 (19.6%) patients in transverse group and 7 (12.9%) patients in cephalad-caudad group and there is no statistical significance between groups in terms of these parameters (p > 0.05, 95% CI 0.19, 1.63).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that cephalad-caudad blunt expansion of the low transverse uterine incision decreases blood loss compared to transverse blunt dissection.