Impact of Single- Versus Double-layer Hysterotomy Closure on Cesarean Niche Development: a Randomized Controlled Trial
For patients and families
In plain language
An automatic summary of structured registry data. It is an orientation aid, not a substitute for the official protocol or a physician assessment.
- What is being studied
- The protocol lists: Hysterotomy closure.
- Who it may be relevant to
- Registry conditions: Cesarean Section; Dehiscence, Uterine Bleeding, Uterus; Scar, Uterus Abnormal. Basic parameters: from 18 years · Female.
- What needs checking
- Age, condition and sex are only basic indicators. Prior treatment, laboratory values and other mandatory requirements appear in the eligibility criteria below.
- Where it takes place
- Italy
- Next step
- Save the trial, show it to the treating physician, and confirm current recruitment with the study center. Costs, documents and travel →
Unsure about the terms? Read our patient guide →
Overview
The objective of this randomized monocentric study is to assess potential variations in the incidence and severity of isthmocele morbidity among women undergoing cesarean section with either single or double-layer closure of the hysterotomy. Our primary outcome aims to investigate whether there is a reduction in the median duration of intermenstrual spotting in patients belonging to the two respective closure groups
Detailed description
Cesarean section, the most widely performed surgical procedure globally, has seen a significant increase in rates over the past decades, rising from 12.1% in 2000 to 21% in 2015 for various reasons. A recognized complication of cesarean sections is the formation of a uterine niche, commonly referred to as isthmocele. However, the true incidence of this post-operative complication remains uncertain, with reported figures ranging widely from 7% to 80%. The considerable variability in these estimates is attributed in part to the varying sensitivity of diagnostic tools. Moreover, there is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding the definition of a cesarean niche, particularly concerning the dimensions of the defect.
Recent well-designed randomized controlled trials have investigated the long-term outcomes of single versus double-layer hysterotomy closure during C-sections. These studies found no significant differences in isthmocele incidence or intermenstrual spotting. However, limitations such as the lack of correlation between symptom severity and uterine defect dimensions, the inclusion of women in labor, and relatively short follow-up periods are acknowledged weaknesses, prompting the need for further analysis.
Our objective is to compare the outcomes of single versus double-layer hysterotomy closure in terms of intermenstrual spotting and isthmocele incidence in singleton women undergoing elective C-sections. Crucially, standardizing the surgical suturing technique is essential to mitigate potential misleading outcomes resulting from inter-operator variations.
Interventions
- Procedure Hysterotomy closure
Hysterotomy closure is done in either one of two ways. Single layer closure consists in a single layer, unlocked suture. Double layer closure consists in a double layer, unlocked suture.
Primary outcome measures
- Intermenstrual bleeding reduction (days) [Time frame: 6 months]
Secondary outcome measures (6)
- Intra-operatory time [Time frame: 6 months]
- Blood loss [Time frame: 6 months]
- Analgesics [Time frame: 6 months]
- Post-operatory recovery time [Time frame: 6 months]
- Time to full patient mobilization [Time frame: 6 months]
- Isthmocele [Time frame: 6 months]
Eligibility criteria
Inclusion criteria
- nulliparous
- singleton
- age 18-45
- spontaneous pregnancy or autologous assisted fertilization
- gestational age 38-40 weeks
- elective C-section
- informed consent
Exclusion criteria
- coagulopathy
- autoimmune diseases
- gestational diabetes
- anticoagulant therapy
- immunosuppressive therapy
- endometriosis
- uterine fibromatosis
- spontaneous labour
- connective tissue diseases
Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.
Healthy volunteers: No
Study design
- Allocation
- Randomized
- Model
- Single group
- Masking
- Open label
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
Study locations
Italy · 1 center
- Fondazione Cà Granda IRCCS Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico di Milano — Milan
Publications
- Hegde CV. The never ending debate single-layer versus double-layer closure of the uterine incision at cesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2014 Aug;64(4):239-40. doi: 10.1007/s13224-014-0573-9. Epub 2014 Jul 23. No abstract available. PMID 25136167
- Qayum K, Kar I, Sofi J, Panneerselvam H. Single- Versus Double-Layer Uterine Closure After Cesarean Section Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cureus. 2021 Sep 30;13(9):e18405. doi: 10.7759/cureus.18405. eCollection 2021 Sep. PMID 34729282
- Marchand GJ, Masoud A, King A, Ruther S, Brazil G, Ulibarri H, Parise J, Arroyo A, Coriell C, Goetz S, Christensen A, Sainz K. Effect of single- and double-layer cesarean section closure on residual myometrial thickness and isthmocele - a systematic review and meta-analysis. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Dec 24;18(4):322-332. doi: 10.4274/tjod.galenos.2021.71173. PMID 34955322
- Verberkt C, Stegwee SI, Van der Voet LF, Van Baal WM, Kapiteijn K, Geomini PMAJ, Van Eekelen R, de Groot CJM, de Leeuw RA, Huirne JAF; 2Close study group. Single-layer vs double-layer uterine closure during cesarean delivery: 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2Close study). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Sep;231(3):346.e1-346.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.12.032. Epub 2023 Dec 26. PMID 38154502
- Budny-Winska J, Zimmer-Stelmach A, Pomorski M. Impact of selected risk factors on uterine healing after cesarean section in women with single-layer uterine closure: A prospective study using two- and three-dimensional transvaginal ultrasonography. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2022 Jan;31(1):41-48. doi: 10.17219/acem/142519. PMID 34738347
- Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saccone G, McCurdy R, Bujold E, Bifulco G, Berghella V. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Nov;50(5):578-583. doi: 10.1002/uog.17401. Epub 2017 Oct 9. PMID 28070914
Identifiers
NCT: NCT06308172 · CSI/2021