ONE- VERSUS TWO-LAYER CLOSURE AT CESAREAN BIRTH

Authors

  • Jabeen Atta Bilawal Medical College, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro
  • Maryam Phulpoto Bilawal Medical College, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro
  • Roohi Nigar Bilawal Medical College, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro
  • Zubair Ahmed Yousfani Bilawal Medical College, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro
  • Muhammad Hanzala Yousfani Bilawal Medical College, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro
  • Noor ul Ain Bilawal Medical College, Liaquat University of Medical and Health Sciences Jamshoro

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55519/JAMC-0-12702

Keywords:

Cesarean section, uterine closure, one-layer technique, two-layer technique, surgical outcomes, postoperative complications

Abstract

 Background: Cesarean delivery is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide. The technique of uterine closure plays a significant role in postoperative recovery and future reproductive outcomes. However, the optimal method of uterine closure—whether one-layer or two-layer—remains a topic of ongoing debate, particularly in terms of uterine healing, surgical complications, and maternal outcomes. Aim: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of one-layer versus two-layer uterine closure techniques following cesarean birth. Methods: This comparative observational study was conducted at Bilawal medical College at LUMHS Jamshoro, from October 2023 to September 2024. A total of 100 women who underwent cesarean sections were included in the study. The research participants formed two comparable groups through uterine closure methods. Group A received one-layer closure while Group B underwent a two-layer closure. Operative time along with estimated blood loss and postoperative pain and febrile morbidity and wound complications were among the collected and analyzed intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. Results: The research showed the operative time for the one-layer closure group was dramatically shorter than the two-layer closure group (p < 0.05). The two treatment groups showed similar results in terms of estimated blood loss together with febrile morbidity and wound complications. The one-layer group had a slightly lower pain score after surgery but the observed difference lacked clinical importance. Conclusion: One-layer uterine closure required less operative time but did not raise the risk of short-term complications after surgery. Research indicates that the one-layer closure method stands as a secure alternative for performing cesarean section delivery which reduces procedure time when compared to standard two-layer techniques. Additional research must evaluate what effects one-layer uterine closure may have on uterine health for future pregnancies.

References

1. Tsuji S, Katsura D, Tokoro S, Inatomi A, Nobuta Y, Yoneoka Y, Amano T,

Murakami T. Two-layer interrupted versus two-layer continuous sutures for

preventing cesarean scar defect: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy

and Childbirth. 2025 Mar 7;25:248.

2. Mackeen AD, Sullivan MV, Berghella V. Evidence-based cesarean delivery:

intraoperative management following placental delivery until skin closure (part

9). American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM. 2025 Jan

1;7(1):101548.

3. Nabighadim M, Vaezi M, Maghalian M, Mirghafourvand M. Ultrasound

outcomes and surgical parameters of the double-layer purse-string uterine

closure technique in cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

of randomized trials. BMC surgery. 2025 Dec;25(1):1-20.

4. Kendle A, Brown H. Cesarean Section. Major Complications of Female Pelvic

Surgery: A Multidisciplinary Approach. 2025 Mar 11:291-300.

5. Zahra Q. Frequency of Uterine Scar Dehiscence and Its Associated Risk Factors

in Patients with Previous Lower Segment Cesarean Section at Jinnah Post

Graduate Medical Center, Karachi. Indus Journal of Bioscience Research. 2025

Feb 28;3(2):688-92.

6. Kolkman I. Caesarean Section in Cows. InEncyclopedia of Livestock Medicine

for Large Animal and Poultry Production 2025 Jan 22 (pp. 1-13). Cham:

Springer Nature Switzerland.

7. Saravanan D, Prabhu K, Chandrasekaran S, Raj P, Murugesan A. Effect of

Early vs Delayed Oral Feeding Following Cesarean Delivery: A Randomized

Controlled Trial. Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and

Gynaecology. 2025 Feb 3;16(S3):S158-62.

8. Takada K, Nishio E, Kotani K, Kobayashi A, Owaki A, Noda Y, Ito M,

Miyamura H, Nishizawa H. Laparoscopic repair combined with hysteroscopy

of cesarean section scar after cesarean scar pregnancy resulting in a live birth: A

case report. Fujita Medical Journal. 2025;11(1):48-51.

9. Pecorella G, Licchelli M, Panese G, Morciano A, Sparic R, Kosmas I, De Rosa

F, Malvasi A, Tinelli A. Laparoscopic repair of uterine rupture after delivery: A

comprehensive evaluation of the uterine rupture management, with a proposal

surgical method. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2025 Mar

14.

10. Cruz SM, Hameedi S, Sbragia L, Ogunleye O, Diefenbach K, Isaacs AM,

Etchegaray A, Olutoye OO. Fetoscopic Myelomeningocele (MMC) Repair:

Evolution of the Technique and a Call for Standardization. Journal of Clinical

Medicine. 2025 Feb 20;14(5):1402.

11. Costa E, Thrasivoulou C, Becker DL, Deprest J, David AL, Chowdhury TT.

Role of Myofibroblasts in the Repair of Iatrogenic Preterm Membranes

Subjected to Mechanical Stimulation. Prenatal Diagnosis. 2025 Jan;45(1):102-

12.

12. Tercan C, Dagdeviren E, Yeniocak AS, Can S, Aktoz F. Comparing the impact

of three‐dimensional display systems and barbed V‐LOC™ sutures in

laparoscopic hysterectomy: A retrospective cohort study. Journal of Obstetrics

and Gynaecology Research. 2025 Feb;51(2):e16251.

13. Matarasso A, BERNSTEIN JL, STEIN MJ. Abdominoplasty: State-of-the-Art.

InTULUA Abdominoplasty 2025 Jan 1 (pp. 479-486). Content Repository

Only!.

14. Hannoudi L, Saleeb N, Dafoulas G. The Solar Shading Performance of the

Multi-Angled Façade System and Its Impact on the Sustainable Improvement

of the Buildings. Energies. 2025 Mar 21;18(7):1565.

15. Adle-Biassette H, Golden JA. Malformations. InGreenfield's Neuropathology

10e Set 2025 (pp. 341-444). CRC Press.

Downloads

Published

2024-02-05

How to Cite

1.
Jabeen Atta, Maryam Phulpoto, Roohi Nigar, Zubair Ahmed Yousfani, Muhammad Hanzala Yousfani, Noor ul Ain. ONE- VERSUS TWO-LAYER CLOSURE AT CESAREAN BIRTH. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad [Internet]. 2024 Feb. 5 [cited 2025 Jun. 2];36(1):190-3. Available from: https://jamc.ayubmed.edu.pk/index.php/jamc/article/view/12702