WITHDRAWN: Absorbable staples for uterine incision at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Staples can be placed during the making of an incision, with the aim of decreasing blood loss from the cut edges. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of using a stapler with absorbable staples to extend the uterine incision at lower segment caesarean section. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of extending the uterine incision using a stapler compared with extending the incision digitally or with scissors in women having a lower segment transverse incision caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eligibility and trial quality were assessed. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials involving 526 women were included. There was no difference in total operating time between the stapling technique and other techniques to extend the incision (weighted mean difference -1.17 minutes, 95% confidence interval -3.57 to 1.22). However stapling devices increased the time needed to deliver the baby (weighted mean difference 0.85 minutes, 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.23). Blood loss was lower with the use of staples (weighted mean difference -41.22 millilitres, 95% confidence interval -50.63 to -31.8). No significant differences between stapling and other techniques were detected for other perinatal morbidity outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to justify the routine use of stapling devices to extend the uterine incision at lower segment caesarean section. There is a possibility that stapling could cause harm, by prolonging the time to deliver the baby.

WITHDRAWN: Lateral tilt for caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: When pregnant women near term lie in the supine position the uterus can compress the inferior vena cava, interfering with venous return to the heart. This can result in hypotension, reduced placental perfusion and decreased fetal oxygenation. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects on the fetus or newborn of lateral tilt at caesarean section compared to the operation carried out with the mother in the supine position. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of lateral tilt (10 to 15 degrees) compared to supine position during caesarean section in pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality assessment and data extraction were done by one reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials involving 293 women were included. The trials were all methodologically poor. There were fewer low Apgar scores when lateral tilt was used, and pH measurements and oxygen saturation appeared to be better when tilt was used. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence from these trials to evaluate use of lateral tilt during caesarean section.

WITHDRAWN: Manual removal of placenta at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Although manual removal of the placenta is commonly carried out, opinions differ about the best technique for delivery of the placenta at caesarean section. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of manual removal of the placenta at caesarean section. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing manual removal of placenta to spontaneous separation and controlled cord traction for delivery in pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality assessment and data extraction were done by one reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials involving 224 women were included. The trials were of reasonable quality. Manual removal of the placenta was associated with a clinically important and statistically significant increase in maternal blood loss (weighted mean difference 436.35, 95% confidence interval 347.82 to 524.90). Manual removal was also associated with increased post-partum endometritis (odds ratio 5.44, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 23.75) and a statistically non-significant trend towards an increase in feto maternal haemorrhage (odds ratio 2.19, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 6.93). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that manual removal of the placenta at caesarean section may do more harm than good, by increasing maternal blood loss and increasing the risk of infection.

WITHDRAWN: Single versus two layer suturing for closing the uterine incision at Caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: A single layer closure might save operating time, disrupt less tissue, introduce less foreign material into the wound, and thus result in less post operative morbidity. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of a single layer closure of the uterine incision at caesarean section, in contrast to conventional two layer closure. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of single layer closure, either interrupted or continuous, compared to two layer closure with continuous sutures in pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials involving 1006 women were included. Based on one trial, single layer closure was associated with reduced operating time (5.6 minutes). Based on one trial, radiographic scar appearance showed fewer scar defects at three months with the single closure group. There were no statistically significant differences in the use of extra haemostatic sutures, incidence of endometritis, decrease in post operative haematocrit or use of blood transfusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There appear to be no advantages or disadvantages for routine use of single layer closure compared to two layer closure, except perhaps a shorter operation time.

Obstetrical attitudes and practices before and after the Canadian Consensus Conference Statement on Cesarean Birth.

This paper describes one aspect of a research program aimed at reducing the incidence of cesarean section in Ontario for women with a previous cesarean section or a breech presentation. Using data from multiple sources--surveys of obstetricians, and hospital administrators, and hospital record statistics, the authors attempt to assess the response of obstetricians to pressure to change their practice. This pressure comes principally from the Canadian Consensus Conference Statement on Cesarean Birth, released in June 1986 and subsequently endorsed by a number of professional organizations. The Statement provides clear guidelines for the management of labour in women with previous cesarean section or a breech presentation. The findings present a number of interpretive challenges. Based on their response to hypothetical cases obstetricians are favourably disposed to considering a trial of labour for women with previous cesarean section and breech presentation. However, both their reported practices, as well as hospital statistics indicate the continued high prevalence of cesarean section, though there is a small decline in cesareans for previous cesarean section. There was no evidence that hospitals lacked appropriate facilities for a trial of labour or had unduly restricted formal policies. Furthermore, although awareness of and agreement with the Consensus Statement recommendations was high, when questioned on the actual details of the recommendations, obstetrician's recall was surprisingly low. Respondents tended to err in the direction of choosing more conservative measures than those recommended by the Statement.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Absorbable staples for uterine incision at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Staples can be placed during the making of an incision, with the aim of decreasing blood loss from the cut edges. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of using a stapler with absorbable staples to extend the uterine incision at lower segment caesarean section. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of extending the uterine incision using a stapler compared with extending the incision digitally or with scissors in women having a lower segment transverse incision caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Eligibility and trial quality were assessed. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials involving 526 women were included. There was no difference in total operating time between the stapling technique and other techniques to extend the incision (weighted mean difference -1.17 minutes, 95% confidence interval -3.57 to 1.22). However stapling devices increased the time needed to deliver the baby (weighted mean difference 0.85 minutes, 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.23). Blood loss was lower with the use of staples (weighted mean difference -41.22 millilitres, 95% confidence interval -50.63 to -31.8). No significant differences between stapling and other techniques were detected for other perinatal morbidity outcomes. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence to justify the routine use of stapling devices to extend the uterine incision at lower segment caesarean section. There is a possibility that stapling could cause harm, by prolonging the time to deliver the baby.

Uterine exteriorization versus intraperitoneal repair at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: After caesarean delivery of the fetus and placenta, the uterus may be placed outside the mother to facilitate repair of the uterine incision. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of exteriorisation of the uterus, compared to the effects of uterine closure within the abdominal cavity. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of uterine exteriorisation for repair compared to intra-abdominal repair for pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials involving 486 women were included. Neither trial was methodologically strong. Exteriorisation made no significant difference to blood loss. Exteriorisation was associated with fewer post-operative febrile days (fever more than three days, odds ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.94) and a non-significant trend towards fewer infections. There was also a non-significant trend towards more nausea and vomiting when exteriorisation was done under regional analgesia. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough information to evaluate the routine use of exteriorisation of the uterus for repair of the uterine incision.

Lateral tilt for caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: When pregnant women near term lie in the supine position the uterus can compress the inferior vena cava, interfering with venous return to the heart. This can result in hypotension, reduced placental perfusion and decreased fetal oxygenation. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects on the fetus or newborn of lateral tilt at caesarean section compared to the operation carried out with the mother in the supine position. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of lateral tilt (10 to 15 degrees) compared to supine position during caesarean section in pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality assessment and data extraction were done by one reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials involving 293 women were included. The trials were all methodologically poor. There were fewer low Apgar scores when lateral tilt was used, and pH measurements and oxygen saturation appeared to be better when tilt was used. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is not enough evidence from these trials to evaluate use of lateral tilt during caesarean section.

Manual removal of placenta at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Although manual removal of the placenta is commonly carried out, opinions differ about the best technique for delivery of the placenta at caesarean section. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of manual removal of the placenta at caesarean section. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing manual removal of placenta to spontaneous separation and controlled cord traction for delivery in pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality assessment and data extraction were done by one reviewer. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials involving 224 women were included. The trials were of reasonable quality. Manual removal of the placenta was associated with a clinically important and statistically significant increase in maternal blood loss (weighted mean difference 436.35, 95% confidence interval 347.82 to 524.90). Manual removal was also associated with increased post-partum endometritis (odds ratio 5.44, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 23.75) and a statistically non-significant trend towards an increase in feto maternal haemorrhage (odds ratio 2.19, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 6.93). REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that manual removal of the placenta at caesarean section may do more harm than good, by increasing maternal blood loss and increasing the risk of infection.

Peritoneal non-closure at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that the peritoneal suture might be omitted during caesarean section without adverse effects. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of non-closure as an alternative to closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section on intra-operative and immediate postoperative outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Controlled trials comparing leaving the visceral and/or parietal peritoneum unsutured at caesarean section with a technique which involves suturing the peritoneum in women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial quality was assessed and data were extracted by two reviewers. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials involving 1194 women were included. Non-closure of the peritoneum saved operating time (weighted mean difference of -6.12 minutes, 95% confidence interval -8.00 to -4.27) with no significant differences in postoperative morbidity, analgesic requirements and length of hospital stay. There was a consistent, although nonsignificant, trend for improved immediate postoperative outcome if the peritoneum was not closed. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be no significant difference in short term morbidity from non-closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section.

Single versus two layer suturing for closing the uterine incision at caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: A single layer closure might save operating time, disrupt less tissue, introduce less foreign material into the wound, and thus result in less post operative morbidity. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of a single layer closure of the uterine incision at caesarean section, in contrast to conventional two layer closure. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of single layer closure, either interrupted or continuous, compared to two layer closure with continuous sutures in pregnant women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One reviewer assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials involving 1006 women were included. Based on one trial, single layer closure was associated with reduced operating time (5.6 minutes). Based on one trial, radiographic scar appearance showed fewer scar defects at three months with the single closure group. There were no statistically significant differences in the use of extra haemostatic sutures, incidence of endometritis, decrease in post operative haematocrit or use of blood transfusion. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There appear to be no advantages or disadvantages for routine use of single layer closure compared to two layer closure, except perhaps a shorter operation time.

Neural tube defects in association with copper intrauterine devices.

Copper-bearing intrauterine devices are being increasingly used for contraception. A growing number of pregnancies, which may subsequently carry to term, are therefore being exposed to high levels of copper at the critical period of organogenesis, with risk of possible teratogenesis. Two cases of anencephaly occurring in association with these devices are reported.

PIP: The possible toxic implications of copper from copper-bearing IUDs in congenital abnormalities of fetuses conceived with the IUD in situ are supported by the presentation of 2 such case histories. In Case 1, the woman became pregnant with a copper IUD in place and the woman delivered, after labor induction at 39 weeks, an anencephalic, stillborn, infant male. Case 2 also had a copper IUD inserted 16 months prior to conception. At 7 weeks from the last menstrual period, an ultrascan was performed because of excessive bleeding, and the IUD was visualized posterior to the sac. At 30 weeks of gestation, the labor was induced and the patient delivered an anencephalic infant. The possible teratogenic effect of copper should be discussed with women who conceive with a copper device in place and elect to continue the pregnancy.

The path towards eHealth: obstacles along the way.

OBJECTIVES: The two authors of this article share both a strong interest in, and deep concerns about, the use of eHealth (electronic information and communication technologies for improving or maintaining health). In this article, we identify some unanticipated obstacles to effective use of eHealth. METHODS: We reflected upon the potential of information and communication technologies to transform the health system and its failure to achieve that potential. RESULTS: We chose seven obstacles: the insufficient emphasis on health in eHealth, the lack of time for reflection, the development of a fortress mentality, poor evaluation of efforts, lack of involvement of youth, inequity, and a parochial attitude that precludes economies of scale. Whenever possible, we provided examples of innovative initiatives that illustrate potential ways to meet our current challenges. CONCLUSION: We believe that the obstacles we describe in this article can be overcome. The impediments are not only technological, but also cognitive, financial and political. To succeed will require a major shift from our ethic of competition to one of generosity, commitment, and collaboration; enlightened, as opposed to narrow, self-interest.

The place of prenatal clases.

The past 20 years has shown an exponential rise in both obstetrical intervention and family centred maternity care. Prenatal classes, although not as yet fully integrated into prenatal care, fill a vital role in teaching couples the information, skills, and attitudes required to participate actively in their reproductive care, and to recognize both their rights and their responsibilities.

Family centered maternity care.

Current practices of obstetrical care tend to hinder rather than facilitate family development and maturation. A program of family centred maternity care is described. Husbands are invited to prenatal visits, and are involved in intensive preparation for labor and delivery. Their presence and active participation in labor, delivery, and postpartum course are encouraged. This, along with a rooming-in policy for the baby, and the utilization of the postpartum period for an intensive training in parenthood, appears to produce a safe and satisfying obstetrical experience for the family.

Randomized controlled trials in the evaluation of antenatal care.

Many of the practices carried out during antenatal care improve the well-being of mother or baby and reduce the burden of adverse perinatal outcome. Other practices have either not been evaluated or have been shown to be ineffective. Evidence from randomized clinical trials provides the best evidence about the effectiveness of these practices.

Having a baby today: how changing attitudes challenge the doctor.

Although having a baby today is safer, more comfortable and more controlled than ever before, changes in society's expectations have resulted in considerable dissatisfaction for both childbearing women and physicians. The apparent conflict can be resolved by open minded, clear and precise communication, and by our recognition of a woman's right to choose what we may not think is right for her.