Literature DB >> 23727518

Extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal cesarean section: a prospective randomized comparison of surgical morbidity.

Carmen Tappauf1, Eva Schest, Philipp Reif, Uwe Lang, Karl Tamussino, Wolfgang Schoell.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We sought to test the hypothesis that an extraperitoneal cesarean section (ECS) technique reduces postoperative pain without increasing intraoperative and postoperative complications. STUDY
DESIGN: In a single-center, single-blinded prospective trial we randomized 54 patients with an indication for primary or first repeat cesarean section at term pregnancy to an ECS (n = 27) or transperitoneal cesarean section (TCS) (n = 27) procedure. Patients with suspected abnormal placentation, a history of >1 cesarean section, or major abdominal surgery were excluded. The primary endpoint of the study was maximum abdominal pain measured by numeric rating scale ranging from 0-10.
RESULTS: Patients after ECS had significantly less maximum surgical site pain than patients after TCS. Median peak pain scores on postoperative day 1 were 4.00 (interquartile range, 3.00-5.00) for ECS and 5.00 (interquartile range, 4.00-7.00) for TCS, respectively (P = .031). Analgesic requirements, intraoperative nausea, and postoperative shoulder pain were significantly less after ECS. Overall operative time was significantly shorter in ECS, with no difference in delivery time. No bladder injury occurred in either group. There were no differences in estimated blood loss and neonatal outcome. Urogenital distress, urinary tract infection, and bowel dysfunction did not differ at discharge from hospital and 6 weeks after.
CONCLUSION: An extraperitoneal approach to cesarean section appears to reduce postoperative pain, usage of analgesics, and intraoperative nausea without an increase in significant complications.
Copyright © 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  extraperitoneal cesarean section; postoperative pain; surgical morbidity

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23727518     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.05.057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  3 in total

1.  [Interdisciplinary position paper "Perioperative pain management"].

Authors:  R Likar; W Jaksch; T Aigmüller; M Brunner; T Cohnert; J Dieber; W Eisner; S Geyrhofer; G Grögl; F Herbst; R Hetterle; F Javorsky; H G Kress; O Kwasny; S Madersbacher; H Mächler; R Mittermair; J Osterbrink; B Stöckl; M Sulzbacher; B Taxer; B Todoroff; A Tuchmann; A Wicker; A Sandner-Kiesling
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 1.107

2.  Early skin-to-skin contact after cesarean section: A randomized clinical pilot study.

Authors:  Martina Kollmann; Lisa Aldrian; Anna Scheuchenegger; Eva Mautner; Sereina A Herzog; Berndt Urlesberger; Reinhard B Raggam; Uwe Lang; Barbara Obermayer-Pietsch; Philipp Klaritsch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  The extraperitoneal French AmbUlatory cesarean section technique leads to improved pain scores and a faster maternal autonomy compared with the intraperitoneal Misgav Ladach technique: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kaouther Dimassi; Ahmed Halouani; Amine Kammoun; Olivier Ami; Benedicte Simon; Luka Velemir; Denis Fauck; Amel Triki
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.