Literature DB >> 34811700

Uterine exteriorization versus in situ repair in Cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hon Sen Tan1, Cameron R Taylor2, Nadir Sharawi3, Rehena Sultana4, Karen D Barton5, Ashraf S Habib6.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on maternal outcomes associated with uterine exteriorization compared with in situ repair in women undergoing Cesarean delivery.
METHODS: We searched for randomized controlled trials comparing uterine exteriorization with in situ repair during Cesarean delivery. Primary outcomes were intraoperative nausea and vomiting (IONV) and perioperative decrease in hemoglobin concentration. Secondary outcomes were postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), estimated blood loss, fever, endometritis, wound infection, intraoperative and postoperative pain, postoperative analgesic use, duration of surgery and hospital stay, and time to return of bowel function.
RESULTS: Twenty studies with 20,909 parturients were included. Exteriorization was associated with higher risk of IONV (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.66 to 2.63; I2 = 0%), with no difference in perioperative hemoglobin concentration decrease (mean difference, - 0.06 g·dL-1; 95% CI, - 0.20 to 0.08; I2 = 97%) compared with in situ repair. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, transfusion requirement, PONV, duration of surgery, duration of hospital stay, time to return of bowel function, fever, endometritis, or wound infection. Postoperative pain (incidence of pain graded > 5/10) at six hours (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.31 to 2.03; I2 = 0%) was higher with exteriorization, but there was no difference in need for rescue analgesia (OR, 2.48; 95% CI, 0.89 to 6.90; I2 = 94%) or pain scores at 24 hr compared with in situ repair.
CONCLUSIONS: In this updated systematic review and meta-analysis, uterine exteriorization was associated with an increased risk of IONV but no significant change in perioperative hemoglobin decrease compared with in situ repair. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42020190074); registered 5 July 2020.
© 2021. Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cesarean delivery; exteriorization; meta-analysis; nausea; vomiting

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34811700     DOI: 10.1007/s12630-021-02142-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can J Anaesth        ISSN: 0832-610X            Impact factor:   6.713


  44 in total

1.  Complete recovery after near-fatal venous air embolism during cesarean section.

Authors:  S N Epps; A J Robbins; G F Marx
Journal:  Int J Obstet Anesth       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.603

Review 2.  Uterine exteriorization compared with in situ repair for Cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Valerie Zaphiratos; Ronald B George; J Colin Boyd; Ashraf S Habib
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2015-08-22       Impact factor: 5.063

Review 3.  Extra-abdominal versus intra-abdominal repair of the uterine incision at caesarean section.

Authors:  D Jacobs-Jokhan; G Hofmeyr
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004-10-18

4.  Influence of uterine exteriorization versus in situ repair on post-Cesarean maternal pain: a randomized trial.

Authors:  S Nafisi
Journal:  Int J Obstet Anesth       Date:  2007-02-05       Impact factor: 2.603

5.  The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  Alessandro Liberati; Douglas G Altman; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Cynthia Mulrow; Peter C Gøtzsche; John P A Ioannidis; Mike Clarke; P J Devereaux; Jos Kleijnen; David Moher
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  The Future of Cesarean Delivery Rates in the United States.

Authors:  Mark A Clapp; William H Barth
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 2.190

7.  Guidelines for intraoperative care in cesarean delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society Recommendations (Part 2).

Authors:  Aaron B Caughey; Stephen L Wood; George A Macones; Ian J Wrench; Jeffrey Huang; Mikael Norman; Karin Pettersson; William J Fawcett; Medhat M Shalabi; Amy Metcalfe; Leah Gramlich; Gregg Nelson; R Douglas Wilson
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Complications of exteriorized compared with in situ uterine repair at cesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Mughina Siddiqui; Eric Goldszmidt; Shafagh Fallah; John Kingdom; Rory Windrim; Jose C A Carvalho
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 9.  Nonfatal venous air embolism during cesarean section: a case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  I P Lowenwirt; D S Chi; S M Handwerker
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Surv       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 2.347

10.  Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range.

Authors:  Xiang Wan; Wenqian Wang; Jiming Liu; Tiejun Tong
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  1 in total

1.  Prevention and management of intra-operative pain during caesarean section under neuraxial anaesthesia: a technical and interpersonal approach.

Authors:  F Plaat; S E R Stanford; D N Lucas; J Andrade; J Careless; R Russell; D Bishop; Q Lo; D Bogod
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 12.893

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.