This study by Vachon-Marceau et al. (AJOG, 2017) aimed to determine if there is a difference in lower uterine segment thickness depending on single or double-layer C-section uterine closure.
Prospective Cohort Study
There is an increased risk of uterine rupture during a trial of labor following C-section. Uterine thickness on ultrasound has been studied as a proxy for scar quality and risk of rupture in future pregnancies. In this study, 1,613 women underwent transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasounds in their third trimester to assess lower uterine segment thickness and scar defects resulting from previous C-section. The sonographers were blinded to clinical information. 495 (31%) women had previously underwent a single-layer and 1,118 (69%) had a double-layer closure. Women who had a double-layer closure had thicker lower uterine segments than women with single-layer closure with a difference of 0.11 mm (95% CI, 0.02-0.21 mm). Using multivariate logistic regression to account for variables, double-layer closure was less likely to result in a thin lower uterine segment thickness of < 2.0 mm (odds ratio 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90). Double-layer closure was also associated with a decreased risk of uterine scar defect with a relative risk of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.17 – 0.61) at birth. Type of thread (catgut vs. synthetic) used for closure had no impact on lower uterine thickness. The authors conclude that double-layer closure resulted in reduced risk of uterine segment thickness <0.2 mm and visible uterine scar defect on ultrasound in the third trimester.
OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.
This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.
The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.
Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.
Jointly provided by
