{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,23]],"date-time":"2026-01-23T06:46:32Z","timestamp":1769150792787,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":20,"publisher":"Georg Thieme Verlag KG","issue":"02","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,4]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>\nPurpose This study aimed to compare the effects of two different suture\nmaterials, monofilament synthetic absorbable sutures versus multifilament\nsynthetic absorbable sutures, on healing the uterine scar after a cesarean\ndelivery.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\nMethods A total of 95 women between the ages of 18 and 40 who had\nundergone a primary cesarean section (CS) after the 38th week of\ngestation. In Group I (n=48), continuous double-layer unlocked closure\nof the low transverse uterine incision was performed using monofilament\nsynthetic absorbable sutures. In Group II (n=47), continuous\ndouble-layer unlocked closure of the low transverse uterine incision was\nperformed using multifilament synthetic absorbable sutures. Six months after the\noperation, the integrity of the cesarean scar at the uterine incision site was\nassessed using hydrosonography. The healing ratio and the thickness of the\nresidual myometrium covering the defect were calculated as markers of uterine\nscar healing.<\/jats:p><jats:p>\nResults No statistically significant differences were observed between\nthe groups with regard to the preoperative hemoglobin concentrations, the change\nin the hemoglobin concentrations, operating time, and the number of\nintraoperative additional hemostatic uterine sutures. Mean thickness of the\nresidual myometrium covering the defect was thicker in the monofilament suture\ngroup in comparison to the multifilament suture group (7.76\u00b12.11 vs.\n5.96\u00b11.69, respectively; p&lt;0.01). The mean healing ratio was\nsignificantly higher in the monofilament suture group in comparison to the\nmultifilament suture group (0.76\u00b10.13 vs. 0.60\u00b10.12,\nrespectively; p&lt;0.01)<\/jats:p><jats:p>\nConclusion Continuous double-layer unlocked closure of the uterine\nincision at cesarean delivery using monofilament synthetic absorbable sutures\ndecreases the risk of CS scar defect.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1055\/a-1179-1393","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,26]],"date-time":"2020-06-26T01:30:51Z","timestamp":1593135051000},"page":"140-145","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":5,"title":["Hydrosonographic Assessment of the Effect of Two Different Suture\nMaterials on Healing of the Uterine Scar after Cesarean Delivery: A Prospective\nRandomized Controlled Trial"],"prefix":"10.1055","volume":"225","author":[{"given":"Osman","family":"Sevket","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul,\nTurkey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Taha","family":"Takmaz","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul,\nTurkey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-0306-6422","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Pinar","family":"Ozcan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul,\nTurkey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Belfin Nur Arici","family":"Halici","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul,\nTurkey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sevde Havva","family":"Islek","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology, Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul,\nTurkey"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"194","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,25]]},"reference":[{"key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"219","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ijgo.2013.11.013","article-title":"Hydrosonographic assessment of the effects of 2 different suturing techniques on\nhealing of the uterine scar after cesarean delivery","volume":"125","author":"O Sevket","year":"2014","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"499","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.14833","article-title":"Cesarean hysterotomy scar in non-pregnant women: reliability of transvaginal\nsonography with and without contrast enhancement","volume":"47","author":"A Baranov","year":"2016","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"90","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.6395","article-title":"High prevalence of defects in Caesarean section scars at transvaginal ultrasound\nexamination","volume":"34","author":"O Vikhareva Osser","year":"2009","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"578","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.17401","article-title":"Risk of cesarean scar defect in single- versus double-layer uterine closure: a\nsystematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","volume":"50","author":"A Di Spiezio Sardo","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1097","DOI":"10.1111\/1471-0528.15048","article-title":"Uterine caesarean closure techniques affect ultrasound findings and maternal\noutcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"125","author":"S I Stegwee","year":"2018","journal-title":"BJOG"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"763","DOI":"10.1080\/08941939.2018.1458926","article-title":"Does suture material affect uterine scar healing after cesarean section? Results\nfrom a randomized controlled trial","volume":"32","author":"A Ba\u015fbu\u011f","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Invest Surg"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"465","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0032-1304829","article-title":"Systematic review of cesarean scar assessment in the nonpregnant state: imaging\ntechniques and uterine scar defect","volume":"29","author":"S Roberge","year":"2012","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"72","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.5200","article-title":"Deficient lower-segment Cesarean section scars: prevalence and risk factors","volume":"31","author":"D Ofili-Yebovi","year":"2008","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"90","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.6395","article-title":"High prevalence of defects in Cesarean section scars at transvaginal ultrasound\nexamination","volume":"34","author":"O V Osser","year":"2009","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"197","DOI":"10.1016\/0002-9610(84)90088-6","article-title":"Effects of physical configuration and chemical structure of suture materials on\nbacterial adhesion. A possible link to wound infection","volume":"147","author":"C C Chu","year":"1984","journal-title":"Am J Surg"},{"key":"ref14","first-page":"474","article-title":"Oral tissue reactions to suture materials","volume":"18","author":"K A Selvig","year":"1998","journal-title":"Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent"},{"key":"ref15","first-page":"23","article-title":"Resorbable suture material in the human skin: tissue reaction and modified\nsuture technic","volume":"39","author":"U Haaf","year":"1988","journal-title":"Hautarzt"},{"key":"ref16","first-page":"2695","article-title":"Why do niches develop in caesarean uterine scars? Hypotheses on the aetiology of\nniche development","volume":"30","author":"A J Vervoort","year":"2015","journal-title":"Hum Reprod"},{"key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1366","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2010.02686.x","article-title":"Caesarean section surgical techniques: a randomised factorial trial\n(CAESAR)","volume":"117","year":"2010","journal-title":"BJOG"},{"key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"578","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.17401","article-title":"Risk of cesarean scar defect in single- versus double-layer uterine closure: a\nsystematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","volume":"50","author":"A Di Spiezio Sardo","year":"2017","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1097","DOI":"10.1111\/1471-0528.15048","article-title":"Uterine caesarean closure techniques affect ultrasound findings and maternal\noutcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"125","author":"S I Stegwee","year":"2018","journal-title":"BJOG"},{"key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"69","DOI":"10.1111\/aogs.13714","article-title":"Ultrasound cesarean scar assessment one year postpartum in relation to one- or\ntwo-layer uterine suture closure","volume":"99","author":"J Hanacek","year":"2020","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"234","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(13)60441-9","article-title":"Caesarean section surgical techniques (CORONIS): a fractional, factorial,\nunmasked, randomised controlled trial","volume":"382","year":"2013","journal-title":"Lancet"},{"key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"75","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.7496","article-title":"Cesarean section scar defects: agreement between transvaginal sonographic\nfindings with and without saline contrast enhancement","volume":"35","author":"O V Osser","year":"2010","journal-title":"Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"31","DOI":"10.1007\/s003300050103","article-title":"Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of incision healing after cesarean\nsections","volume":"7","author":"O Dicle","year":"1997","journal-title":"Eur Radiol"}],"container-title":["Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie"],"original-title":[],"language":"de","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/products\/ejournals\/pdf\/10.1055\/a-1179-1393.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,19]],"date-time":"2021-04-19T22:40:05Z","timestamp":1618872005000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/DOI\/DOI?10.1055\/a-1179-1393"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,25]]},"references-count":20,"journal-issue":{"issue":"02","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,4,19]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,4]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/a-1179-1393","relation":{},"ISSN":["0948-2393","1439-1651"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0948-2393","type":"print"},{"value":"1439-1651","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020,6,25]]}}}