The modified Misgav-Ladach versus the Pfannenstiel-Kerr technique for cesarean section: a randomized trial. Extraperitoneal lower segment caesarean section for infected cases. A reappraisal. Can Joel-Cohen incision and single layer reconstruction reduce cesarean section morbidity? Study on modification of the Misgav Ladach method for cesarean section. Comparison of two transverse abdominal incisions for cesarean delivery. Modified Joel-Cohen technique for caesarean delivery. A randomized clinical trial of two surgical techniques for cesarean section. Introduction of the Misgav Ladach caesarean section at an African tertiary centre: a randomised controlled trial. The Misgav Ladach method for cesarean section compared to the Pfannenstiel method. [Comparison of two cesarean techniques: classic versus Misgav Ladach cesarean]. Joel-Cohen or Pfannenstiel incision at cesarean delivery: does it make a difference? [In Process Citation] Short-term outcome of newborn infants born by a modified procedure of cesarean section. A prospective randomized study.
Modifications to the classic cesarean section technique described by Pfannenstiel and Kerr have been proposed in the last few years. The objective of this trial was to compare intraoperative and short-term postoperative outcomes between the Pfannenstiel-Kerr and the modified Misgav-Ladach (MML) techniques for cesarean section.
                This prospective randomized trial involved 162 patients undergoing transverse lower uterine segment cesarean section. Patients were allocated to one of the two arms: 88 to the MML technique and 74 to the Pfannenstiel-Kerr technique. Main outcome measures were defined as the duration of surgery, analgesic requirements, and bowel restitution by the second postoperative day. Additional outcomes evaluated were febrile morbidity, postoperative antibiotic use, postpartum endometritis, and wound complications. Student's t, Mann-Whitney, and Chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis of the results, and a p < 0.05 was considered as the probability level reflecting significant differences.
                No differences between groups were noted in the incidence of analgesic requirements, bowel restitution by the second postoperative day, febrile morbidity, antibiotic requirements, endometritis, or wound complications. The MML technique took on average 12 min less to complete (p = 0.001).
                The MML technique is faster to perform and similar in terms of febrile morbidity, time to bowel restitution, or need for postoperative medications. It is likely to be more cost-effective. nan To compare an innovative cesarean section based on Joel-Cohen incision with the traditional Pfannenstiel technique in terms of operative data and post-operative recovery.
                Out of 158 randomized patients, 83 patients underwent the innovative cesarean section (Joel-Cohen incision, one-layer locked uterine suture, no peritoneization) and 75 the traditional operative approach (Pfannenstiel incision, double layer closure of the uterus, visceral and parietal peritoneization). Operative data and post-operative morbidity were compared; sample size was calculated to detect a 13% difference in the occurrence of post-operative fever with a statistical power of 80%.
                Post-operative fever was not different in the two groups. Total operating time was shorter with the innovative technique: 31.6 +/-1.38 min vs. 44.4+/-1.44 (P=0.0001) and fewer sutures were used: 3.6+/-0.13 vs. 6+/-0.13 (P=0.001). Patients operated by the new technique began moving sooner and intestinal function restarted earlier.
                The proposed technique made for shorter operating times and faster recovery but no decrease in puerperal morbidity. 172 cases of pregnant women scheduled for delivery by cesarean section were randomly assigned to 59 cases in modification group with modified Misgav Ladach technique, 57 cases in Misgav Ladach group with Misgav Ladach technique and 56 cases in Pfannenstiel group with Pfannenstiel technique from May to Dec. 1999. The modified points included: transversely incising the fascia 2 to 3 cm, then dividing it bluntly; without opening and dissociating the visceral peritoneum; two layers suturing of low transverse uterine incision; closing the skin by continuous suturing. Results showed the average delivery time in the modification group was (3.6 +/- 2.6) min and (5.7 +/- 2.9) min in the Misgav Ladach group (P < 0.05). Median operating time was (28.3 +/- 5.4) min in modification group compared with (27.5 +/- 6.5) min in the Misgav Ladach group (P > 0.05). Average blood loss was (128 +/- 35) ml in modification group compared with (212 +/- 147) ml in the Pfannenstiel group (P < 0.05). It was concluded that the modified Misgav Ladach technique not only preserved all advantages of Misgav Ladach method, but also had additional advantages, such as faster in delivering the fetus, less damage, easier mastering for obstetricians. nan To investigate whether a series of changes in the current caesarean section operative routine, based on new knowledge, would be beneficial.
                A prospective controlled trial.
                Labour ward with approximately 3000 deliveries annually in a suburban area of Gothenburg, Sweden.
                Seventy-two pregnant women scheduled for delivery by caesarean section were randomised to either modified Joel-Cohen technique (n = 36) or Pfannenstiel technique (n = 36).
                Blood loss during surgery and operating time.
                The median estimated intra-operative blood loss was 250 mL in the modified Joel-Cohen group and 400 mL in the Pfannenstiel group (P = 0.026). The proportion of women with > or = 300 mL was 16/36 in the modified Joel-Cohen group vs 28/36 in the Pfannenstiel group (OR 0.229, 95% CI 0.082-0.637). Median operating time was 20 min in the modified Joel-Cohen group compared with 28 min in the Pfannenstiel group (P < 0.001). The proportion of women with > or = 25 min was 1/36 in the modified Joel-Cohen group vs 33/36 in the Pfannenstiel group (OR 0.003, 95% CI 0.000-0.026).
                We conclude that the modified Joel-Cohen technique of caesarean delivery reduced intraoperative blood loss and operating time compared with the Pfannenstiel technique. The Joel-Cohen incision followed by nonclosure of pelvic and parietal peritoneum has been advocated as an alternative method to the Pfannenstiel incision with peritonealization at cesarean section. A randomized trial was designed to compare intra- and postoperative morbidity between the two techniques. Women to undergo a cesarean section were randomly allocated to have either the Joel-Cohen incision with the parietal and pelvic peritoneum left open (group 1) or to have the Pfannenstiel incision with both peritoneal layers sutured (group 2). The myometrium was closed with 1-0 polyglactin 910 suture using a continuous single-layer nonlocking technique. Patients in group 2 had the peritoneum approximated with 2-0 polyglactin 910 suture. The fascia was sutured with continuous 1-0 polyglactin 910 suture in all cases. Opening time was defined as the interval from skin incision to the opening of the uterine cavity. Febrile morbidity was defined as a temperature > or =38 degrees C on two occasions 4 hours (hr) apart excluding the first postoperative day. Endometritis was defined as postpartum temperature > or =38 degrees C on two occasions 4 hr apart, with uterine tenderness and/or foul-smelling lochia. One hundred forty-nine and 150 patients were allocated to group 1 and to group 2, respectively. A shorter median (range) opening time [4 min (2-21) vs. 6 min (2-19), respectively, p < 0.01] and a shorter median (range) operative time [30 min (10-65) vs. 40 min (20-110), respectively, p < 0.01] were observed in group 1. No difference was found in terms of intraoperative complications, proportion of patients who required transfusion, endometritis, sepsis, febrile morbidity, and urinary tract infections. A higher rate of wound infections was found in group 2 than in group 1 [14 of 150 (9.3%) vs. 2 of 149 (1.3%), respectively, p < 0.01]. The Joel-Cohen incision without peritonealization resulted in a shorter opening and total operative time than the Pfannenstiel laparotomy with peritonealization. This was accomplished with a reduction of wound infections. To determine whether the Misgav Ladach caesarean section technique can offer benefits compared with conventional caesarean section technique in the prevailing conditions of a busy African tertiary centre.
                A randomised controlled trial.
                A tertiary African obstetric unit with 18,000 deliveries annually.
                Three hundred and thirty-nine women undergoing caesarean section.
                Eight residents and registrars were instructed in the Misgav Ladach technique for caesarean section during one week, after which the study commenced. The course participants instructed their colleagues; in total, 16 doctors participated. Women requiring caesarean section were randomised to Misgav Ladach or to the conventional lower midline incision procedure, excluding those with a previous scar.
                During 11 weeks 339 randomised procedures (328 of which were emergency procedures) were carried out. Mean operating time was 25 x 3 minutes for Misgav Ladach and 32 x 6 minutes for the lower midline incision procedure (95% CI -8 x 3; -6 x 3). Mean blood loss was 354 mL and 447 mL (-133; -53), and the number of sutures 3 x 1 and 6 x 1 (-3 x 1; -2 x 9), respectively. No significant difference was found in Apgar scores. Mobilisation was earlier with the Misgav Ladach procedure. No difference was found in overall post-operative infection rates i.e. wound infection or febrile illness, but the combination of wound infection and fever was more common in the Misgav Ladach group.
                The Misgav Ladach caesarean section confers benefits such as reduced blood loss, conservation of time and suture material, and rapid mobilisation, but more studies are needed to explore modifications aimed at reducing post-operative infections in settings with limited resources. The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcome of two different methods of cesarean section (CS).
                The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.
                All CS were performed at the University Hospital in Uppsala, Sweden.
                Fifty women admitted to hospital for a first elective CS were consecutively included in the study. They were randomly allocated to two groups.
                One group was operated on by the Misgav Ladach method for CS and the other group by the Pfannenstiel method. All operations were performed by the same surgeon.
                Duration of operation, amount of bleeding, analgesics required, scar appearance and length of hospitalization.
                Operating time was significantly different between the two methods, with an average of 12.5 minutes with the Misgav Ladach method and 26 minutes with the Pfannenstiel method (p<0.001). The amount of blood loss differed significantly, with 448 ml and 608 ml respectively (p=0.017). Significantly less analgesic injections and tablets (p=0.004) were needed after the Misgav Ladach method.
                The Misgav Ladach method of CS has advantages over the Pfannenstiel method by being significantly quicker to perform, with a reduced amount of bleeding and diminished postoperative pain. The women were satisfied with the appearance of their scars. In this study no negative effects of the new operation technique were discovered. The aim of the study was to compare two cesarean section techniques Methodology. A prospective study was conducted UB 400 cesareans performed at the Gynecological and Obstetric Clinic of the Dakar Teaching Hospital between March 2000 and August 2000. Two hundred patients underwent the classical procedure (CL group) and the other 200 the Misgav Ladach procedure (ML group). Per- and post-operative data were compared between the two groups with Student's test and the Chi(2) test. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
                The two groups were similar for socio-demographic and clinical data. The delay between the skin incision and infant delivery was significantly shorter in the ML group (5 minutes 26 seconds versus 6 minutes 20 seconds). The same trend was found for the length of operation (36 minutes 36 seconds versus 54 minutes 38 seconds). Fewer sutures were used in the ML group (2.92 versus 4.14). There is no significant difference for dose of analgesia, post-operative complications and hospital discharge. Cost analysis demonstrated that the Misgav Ladach procedure was 10000 FCFA (15 euros) less costly.
                Misgav Ladach method is simple, rapid, cost-effective cesarean procedure which appears to be an attractive alternative to traditional cesarean section. To evaluate whether the technique to open the abdomen might influence the operative time and the maternal and neonatal outcome.
                All consecutive women who underwent a cesarean section at a gestational age greater than or equal to 32 weeks were randomly allocated to have either the Joel-Cohen or the Pfannenstiel incision. Exclusion criteria were two or more previous cesarean sections and previous longitudinal abdominal incision. During the study period 366 patients underwent a cesarean delivery. Of these patients, 56 did not meet the inclusion criteria. The remaining patients were allocated to the Joel-Cohen (n = 152) group and to the Pfannenstiel (n = 158) group. Extraction time was defined as the time interval from skin incision to the clamping of the umbilical cord.
                The total operative time was similar in both groups [Joel-Cohen 32 min (12-60) vs. Pfannenstiel 33 min (18-70)]. The extraction time was shorter in the Joel-Cohen group than in the Pfannenstiel group [190 s (60-600) vs. 240 s (50-600), p = 0.05]. This remained statistically significant after adjustment for confounding variables (Hazard = 1.26, p = 0.05). No difference was found between groups in terms of intraoperative and postoperative complications. No difference was found in the neonatal neurodevelopmental assessment at 6 months of age in relation to the abdominal incision performed.
                The Joel-Cohen method of opening the abdomen at cesarean delivery is faster then the Pfannenstiel technique at delivering the fetus. However, considering the absence of benefits to the mother and the fetus there is no clear indication for performing a Joel-Cohen incision. This paper was intended to settle the question whether the so-called gentle sectio caesarea with a high skin incision as described by Cohen in 1972 [2] could be applied in combination with a sectio on the level of the classic Pfannenstiel's incision which would be more satisfying cosmetically. Furthermore a comparison was to be drawn between the postoperative condition of those patients on whom this surgical method had been performed and the condition following a classic Pfannenstiel's incision. Between January 1997 and July 1997 we compared the classic method of Pfannenstiel's incision with the variant of Cohen's method as described above in a prospective randomised study. On applying this surgical technique, the abdomen was opened according to Cohen's method using a surgical knife but for the skin, and the tissue layers underneath were opened blunt with two fingers. Following the extraction of the child only three sutures were made: Uterus, fascia and skin. Redon drainages were not inserted. We were able to show that this method of applying mainly blunt "incision" to sectio caesarea the tissue is at least equal to the sharp opening of the abdominal cavity. In some respects, such as the early postoperative mobilisation, it is, in fact, superior, because the blunt opening causes less bleeding and the reduction to three sutures only, deliberately leaving the two peritoneal membranes open, as well as leaving away the redon drainages, considerably increases the patients' postoperative well-being. It is for these reasons that we call for this method to become part of the routine procedures in caesarean sectio. nan
'Joel-Cohen based' methods have advantages compared to Pfannenstiel and to traditional (lower midline) CS techniques, which could translate to savings for the health system. However, these trials do not provide information on mortality and serious or long-term morbidity such as morbidly adherent placenta and scar rupture.

[Note: The 19 citations in the awaiting classification section of the review may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.]