Jelsema R D, Wittingen J A, Vander Kolk K J
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, Butterworth Hospital, Grand Rapids 49503.
J Reprod Med. 1993 May;38(5):393-6.
Continuous, locking, single-layer closure of the low transverse uterine incision has been used, with a reportedly decreased risk of endometritis, decreased operating time and no increased risk of rupture with subsequent vaginal birth when compared with the more traditional, two-layer repair. However, in other tissues, such as fascia and skin, locking sutures cause increased tissue damage and weaker scars. We decided to determine the safety in the perioperative period of continuous, nonlocking, single-layer repair. Over a six-month period, 100 patients who had continuous, nonlocking, single-layer repair of their low transverse uterine incisions were compared with 100 matched controls who had the traditional, two-layer repair of a locking suture followed by an imbricating layer. Febrile morbidity, rates of endometritis, blood loss, requirements for additional hemostatic sutures and operating times were compared. Except for increased additional hemostatic suture use and decreased operating times in the single-layer group, we found no differences between the two methods. The continuous, nonlocking, single-layer technique is not only expedient and cost efficient but also safe in the perioperative period. It has the additional theoretical advantage of less tissue damage, which may result in a stronger wound and thus in a reduced risk of rupture with subsequent labor.
低横切口子宫连续、锁边、单层缝合已被采用,据报道与更传统的双层修复相比,子宫内膜炎风险降低、手术时间缩短,且后续经阴道分娩时子宫破裂风险未增加。然而,在其他组织,如筋膜和皮肤,锁边缝合会导致更大的组织损伤和更弱的瘢痕。我们决定确定连续、非锁边、单层修复在围手术期的安全性。在六个月的时间里,将100例行低横切口子宫连续、非锁边、单层修复的患者与100例匹配的对照组患者进行比较,对照组采用传统的锁边缝合双层修复并加用褥式缝合层。比较了发热性疾病、子宫内膜炎发生率、失血量、额外止血缝合的需求和手术时间。除了单层组额外止血缝合使用增加和手术时间缩短外,我们发现两种方法之间没有差异。连续、非锁边、单层技术不仅方便且成本效益高,而且在围手术期是安全的。它还有理论上的额外优势,即组织损伤更小,这可能导致伤口更牢固,从而降低后续分娩时子宫破裂的风险。