{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,19]],"date-time":"2025-06-19T04:15:19Z","timestamp":1750306519684,"version":"3.41.0"},"reference-count":19,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,25]],"date-time":"2025-01-25T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1737763200000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,25]],"date-time":"2025-01-25T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1737763200000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100004375","name":"Tel Aviv University","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100004375","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Arch Gynecol Obstet"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Purpose<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>This study aimed to assess the impact of absorbable subcutaneous staples for skin closure in cesarean delivery (CD) on maternal morbidity.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single tertiary university-affiliated medical center between January 2011 and April 2022. In 2020, a new technique involving absorbable subcutaneous staples for skin closure in CD was introduced. We compared surgical outcomes among three groups: non-absorbable staples, absorbable subcutaneous staples, and absorbable subcutaneous sutures. Data were compared between the three groups and demographic, obstetric, and surgical characteristics were analyzed using univariate and multivariate analysis.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>During the study period, 31,660 CDs were performed in our center. The data of 31,419 CDs were available for analysis. Absorbable subcutaneous staples were associated with a significantly shorter surgery time in comparison to non-absorbable staples and sutures (52 min vs 53 min vs 60 min, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&lt;\u20090.001). No differences were found in rates of wound infections or any surgical site surgery in the 45 days following CD. In a multivariate analysis: the use of absorbable subcutaneous staples was associated with a significantly lower risk for prolonged hospitalization\u2009&gt;\u20095 days (OR 0.6, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&lt;\u20090.001) and re-admission within 45 days (OR 0.8, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.04).<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>The use of absorbable subcutaneous staples for skin closure during CD is associated with shorter surgery times and a lower risk of prolonged hospitalization and readmission within 45 days.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00404-024-07911-6","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,25]],"date-time":"2025-01-25T10:47:57Z","timestamp":1737802077000},"page":"125-129","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["Comparison of complications and surgery outcomes in skin closure methods following cesarean sections"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"312","author":[{"given":"Daniel","family":"Gabbai","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Chen","family":"Jacoby","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Itamar","family":"Gilboa","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sharon","family":"Maslovitz","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Yariv","family":"Yogev","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Emmanuel","family":"Attali","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,25]]},"reference":[{"key":"7911_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"5","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2020-0305","volume":"49","author":"C Antoine","year":"2020","unstructured":"Antoine C, Young BK (2020) Cesarean section one hundred years 1920\u20132020: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly. J Perinat Med 49:5\u201316. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1515\/jpm-2020-0305","journal-title":"J Perinat Med"},{"key":"7911_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1295","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000011","volume":"122","author":"WF Rayburn","year":"2013","unstructured":"Rayburn WF, Strunk AL (2013) Profiles about practice settings of American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists fellows. Obstet Gynecol 122:1295\u20131298. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000011","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"7911_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jogoh.2020.101987","volume":"50","author":"M Carbonnel","year":"2021","unstructured":"Carbonnel M, Brot D, Benedetti C, Kennel T, Murtada R, Revaux A et al (2021) Risks factors FOR wound complications after cesarean section. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod 50:101987. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jogoh.2020.101987","journal-title":"J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod"},{"key":"7911_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0270337","volume":"17","author":"Y Huang","year":"2022","unstructured":"Huang Y, Yin X, Wei J, Li S (2022) Comparison of the effect of skin closure materials on skin closure during cesarean delivery. PLoS One 17:e0270337. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0270337","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"key":"7911_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"293","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004872","volume":"140","author":"AD Mackeen","year":"2022","unstructured":"Mackeen AD, Sullivan MV, Schuster M, Berghella V (2022) Suture compared with staples for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 140:293\u2013303. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004872","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"7911_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"378","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2010.11.018","volume":"204","author":"FSH Clay","year":"2011","unstructured":"Clay FSH, Walsh CA, Walsh SR (2011) Staples vs subcuticular sutures for skin closure at cesarean delivery: a metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 204:378\u2013383. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2010.11.018","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"7911_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"916","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.12142","volume":"92","author":"AG Huppelschoten","year":"2013","unstructured":"Huppelschoten AG, van Ginderen JC, van den Broek KC, Bouwma AE, Oosterbaan HP (2013) Different ways of subcutaneous tissue and skin closure at cesarean section: a randomized clinical trial on the long-term cosmetic outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 92:916\u2013924. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/aogs.12142","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"issue":"265","key":"7911_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2009.01.019","volume":"200","author":"J-A Rousseau","year":"2009","unstructured":"Rousseau J-A, Girard K, Turcot-Lemay L, Thomas N (2009) A randomized study comparing skin closure in cesarean sections: staples vs subcuticular sutures. Am J Obstet Gynecol 200(265):e1-4. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ajog.2009.01.019","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"7911_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"53","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2016.07.501","volume":"206","author":"TL Schrufer-Poland","year":"2016","unstructured":"Schrufer-Poland TL, Ruiz MP, Kassar S, Tomassian C, Algren SD, Yeast JD (2016) Incidence of wound complications in cesarean deliveries following closure with absorbable subcuticular staples versus conventional skin closure techniques. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 206:53\u201356. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2016.07.501","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"7911_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"502","DOI":"10.1111\/1471-0528.15532","volume":"126","author":"AM Madsen","year":"2019","unstructured":"Madsen AM, Dow ML, Lohse CM, Tessmer-Tuck JA (2019) Absorbable subcuticular staples versus suture for caesarean section closure: a randomised clinical trial. BJOG 126:502\u2013510. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/1471-0528.15532","journal-title":"BJOG"},{"key":"7911_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"979","DOI":"10.1007\/s00404-011-2121-5","volume":"285","author":"J Nitsche","year":"2012","unstructured":"Nitsche J, Howell C, Howell T (2012) Skin closure with subcuticular absorbable staples after cesarean section is associated with decreased analgesic use. Arch Gynecol Obstet 285:979\u2013983. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00404-011-2121-5","journal-title":"Arch Gynecol Obstet"},{"key":"7911_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"48S","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000533005.13729.fa","volume":"131","author":"T Kawakita","year":"2018","unstructured":"Kawakita T, Tefera E (2018) Risk factors for readmission due to infection after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 131:48S-48S. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/01.AOG.0000533005.13729.fa","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"7911_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"23","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2022.04.026","volume":"274","author":"D Gabbai","year":"2022","unstructured":"Gabbai D, Attali E, Ram S, Amikam U, Ashwal E, Hiersch L et al (2022) Prediction model for prolonged hospitalization following cesarean delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 274:23\u201327. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2022.04.026","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"key":"7911_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e187","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0040-1709681","volume":"10","author":"JJ Federspiel","year":"2020","unstructured":"Federspiel JJ, Suresh SC, Darwin KC, Szymanski LM (2020) Hospitalization duration following uncomplicated cesarean delivery: predictors, facility variation, and outcomes. AJP Rep 10:e187\u2013e197. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/s-0040-1709681","journal-title":"AJP Rep"},{"key":"7911_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"702","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000001043","volume":"126","author":"AD Mackeen","year":"2015","unstructured":"Mackeen AD, Khalifeh A, Fleisher J, Han C, Leiby B, Berghella V (2015) Pain associated with cesarean delivery skin closure: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 126:702\u2013707. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0000000000001043","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"7911_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1042","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0042-1743248","volume":"39","author":"A Oben","year":"2022","unstructured":"Oben A, Perez W, Jauk VC, Boggess K, Clark E, Saade G et al (2022) Timing of maternal discharge after cesarean delivery and risk of maternal readmission. Am J Perinatol 39:1042\u20131047. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/s-0042-1743248","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"key":"7911_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/ijgo.15026","author":"D Gabbai","year":"2023","unstructured":"Gabbai D, Lavie A, Yogev Y, Attali E (2023) The association between indications for cesarean delivery and surgery time. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ijgo.15026","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"key":"7911_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"CD003577","DOI":"10.1002\/14651858.CD003577.pub3","volume":"11","author":"AD Mackeen","year":"2012","unstructured":"Mackeen AD, Berghella V, Larsen M-L (2012) Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11:CD003577. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/14651858.CD003577.pub3","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"key":"7911_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"682","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31820ad61e","volume":"117","author":"MG Tuuli","year":"2011","unstructured":"Tuuli MG, Rampersad RM, Carbone JF, Stamilio D, Macones GA, Odibo AO (2011) Staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 117:682\u2013690. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/AOG.0b013e31820ad61e","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"}],"container-title":["Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00404-024-07911-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00404-024-07911-6\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00404-024-07911-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,6,18]],"date-time":"2025-06-18T06:11:56Z","timestamp":1750227116000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00404-024-07911-6"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,25]]},"references-count":19,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,7]]}},"alternative-id":["7911"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00404-024-07911-6","relation":{},"ISSN":["1432-0711"],"issn-type":[{"type":"electronic","value":"1432-0711"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,1,25]]},"assertion":[{"value":"14 November 2024","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"18 December 2024","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"25 January 2025","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The trial was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (2000) for human studies (IRB number TLV-0284-08). The authors received no funds nor have conflicts of interest.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}}]}}