Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Saudi Med J. 2000 Aug;21(8):759-61.

A randomized controlled study of peritoneal closure at cesarean section.

Author information

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital, PO Box 38, Al-Khod 123, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman.



To assess the benefits or problems that may be associated with peritoneal closure at cesarean section.


A randomized-controlled study of women undergoing cesarean section in Sultan Qaboos University Hospital Maternity Unit. After the decision is taken for cesarean section, women were randomized to either repair of peritoneum using standard technique or non-repair of peritoneum. Duration of operation, maternal morbidity, blood loss assessed by post-operative hemoglobin change and requirement of transfusion, post operative infection, thromboembolic disease, and length of hospital stay were analyzed in 2 groups of patients. Sixty women were randomized into the study, 30 group A, had peritoneal closure and 30, group B, and had non-closure.


The average duration of operation for group A was 61.9+/-12.734, and for group B was 53.56 +/-11.209 (p< 0.01 statistically significant). There was no statistically significant difference in the length of stay, estimated blood loss, the mean drop in hemoglobin, postoperative pyrexia, and wound infection rate between the 2 groups.


Our study has confirmed the previous study findings, and has shown that there are no advantages in suturing of the peritoneum in terms of blood loss, blood transfusion, operation duration, postoperative pyrexia and wound infection. In fact non-suturing of the peritoneum was associated with shorter operation duration (p< 0.01 significant), and reduced cost.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Support Center