Surgical staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cesarean delivery is the most common surgical procedure and this prevalence is on the rise. Given these trends, cesarean wound complications, such as disruption or infection, remain an important cause of post-cesarean morbidity. Methods: We conducted a single-center randomized controlled trial that included women with viable pregnancies (≥24 weeks) undergoing cesarean delivery at Motahary University Hospital, Urmia, Iran from April to November 2014. All cesarean types were included: scheduled or unscheduled and primary or repeat cesareans. Women were excluded for the following reasons: inability to obtain informed consent, immune compromising disease (e.g. AIDS), chronic steroid use, diabetic mellitus and BMI≥30. Of 266 women, 133 were randomized to staples and 133 women to suture group. Results: The mean±SD age of the staples group was 27.6±5.4 years and mean±SD age of suture was 28.7±5.9 years. Multiparity is the most frequent in both groups that by using Chi-square test, no significant differences were observed between the two groups (P=0.393). The most frequent indication for cesarean section in both groups was history of cesarean section in staple 40 cases (30.1%) and suture 32 cases (24.1%). The survey was conducted using the Chi-square test was not significant (P=0.381). Pain at 6 weeks postoperatively was significantly less in the staple group (P=0.001). Operative time was longer with suture closure (4.68±0.67 versus 1.03±0.07 minute, P<0.001). The Vancouver scale score was significantly less in suture closure (6.6±0.8 versus 7.5±0.9, P=0.001). Wound disruption was significantly less in suture closure (3.8% versus 11.3%, P=0.017). Conclusion: The staple group had low pain and operation time but had a significant wound disruption and scar. The patients who have suffered a significant wound disruption were affected by age (P=0.022) and BMI (P=0.001) at compared those who were not affected by factors such as age or high BMI as risk factors for open surgical wound.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".