Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Superficial incisional surgical site infection rate after cesarean section in obese women: a randomized controlled trial of subcuticular versus interrupted skin suturing

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the superficial incisional surgical site infection (SSI) rate after cesarean section (CS) in obese women using subcuticular versus interrupted skin suturing.

Methods

The current randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at Ain Shams University Maternity Hospital. Obese non-diabetic women who underwent elective CS were randomized into two groups: group I included women who had their skin closed with interrupted mattress suture using non-absorbable polypropylene, and group II included women who had their skin closed with subcuticular suture using the same suture material. Primary outcome measure was superficial incisional SSI and secondary outcome measures were skin closure time, postoperative pain assessed by ten-point visual analog scale (VAS) and short-term cosmetic wound outcome according to the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES).

Results

A total of 130 obese women were finally analyzed. Group II (n = 67) was associated with higher incidence of superficial incisional SSI. There were nine cases (13.4 %) compared to three cases (4.8 %) in group I (n = 63); however, this difference was statistically not significant (P = 0.088). Skin closure time was significantly prolonged in group I (8.6 ± 2.3 min versus 5.7 ± 2.2 min, respectively, P < 0.001). Postoperative pain was significantly lower in group I and the mean VAS in group I was 4.7 ± 2 versus 5.5 ± 1.8 in group II (P = 0.017). Using SBSES, group II had mean score 4.5 ± 0.7, while group I had mean score 2.7 ± 1.1. This was statistically significant (P < 0.001), which means a better cosmetic outcome in group II.

Conclusion

Subcuticular skin closure during CS for non-diabetic obese women was significantly associated with better short-term cosmetic outcome, less skin closure time, yet, with slightly higher risk of superficial incisional SSI and significantly more postoperative pain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BMI:

Body mass index

CS:

Cesarean section

SBSES:

Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale

SSI:

Surgical site infection

VAS:

Visual analog scale

References

  1. Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP (2005) Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193:1607–1617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tuuli MG, Rampersad RM, Carbone JF, Stamilio D, Macones GA, Odibo AO (2011) Staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 117:682

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vermillion ST, Lamoutte C, Soper DE, Verdeja A (2000) Wound infection after cesarean. Effect of subcutaneous tissue thickness. Obstet Gynecol 95(6):26–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tully L, Gates S, Brocklehurst P, McKenzie-McHarg K, Ayers S (2002) Surgical techniques used during caesarean section operations: results of a national survey of practice in the UK. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 102:120–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Galal I, El-Hindawy K (2011) Impact of using triclosan-antibacterial sutures on incidence of surgical site infection. Am J Surg Aug 202(2):133–138

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lucas DN, Yentis SM, Kinsella SM et al (2000) Urgency of caesarean section: a new classification. J R Soc Med 93:346–350

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chelmow D, Rodriguez EJ, Sabatini MM (2004) Suture closure of subcutaneous fat and wound disruption after cesarean delivery: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 103(5 Pt 1):974–980

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA (2008) CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. AJIC 36:313–314

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fearmonti R, Bond J, Erdmann D, Levinson H (2010) A review of scar scales and scar measuring devices. Eplasty 10:e43

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leth RA, Uldbjerg N, Nørgaard M, Møller JK, Thomsen RW (2011) Obesity, diabetes, and the risk of infections diagnosed in hospital and post-discharge infections after cesarean section: a prospective cohort study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 90(5):501–509

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Altman AD, Allen VM, McNeil SA, Dempster J (2009) Pfannenstiel incision closure: a review of current skin closure techniques. JOGC 31:514–520

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Clay FS, Walsh CA, Walsh SR (2011) Staples versus subcuticular sutures for skin closure at cesarean delivery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Obstet Gynecol 204:378–383

    Google Scholar 

  13. McLean NR, Fyfe AH, Flint EF, Irvine BH, Calvert MH (1980) Comparison of skin closure using continuous and interrupted nylon sutures. Br J Surg 67:633–635

    Google Scholar 

  14. Onwuanyi ON, Evbuomwan I (1990) Skin closure during appendectomy: a controlled clinical trial of subcuticular and interrupted transdermal suture techniques. J R Coll Surg Edinb 35:353–355

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Frishman GN, Schwartz T, Hogan JW (1997) Closure of Pfannenstiel skin incisions. Staples versus subcuticular suture. J Reprod Med 42:627–630

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Rousseau JA, Girard K, Turcot-Lemay L, Thomas N (2009) A randomized study comparing skin closure in cesarean sections: staples vs subcuticular sutures. Am J Obstet Gynecol Mar 200(3):265e1–265e4

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Gottardi A, Cherubino M, Uccella S, Valdatta L (2010) Cosmetic outcomes of various skin closure methods following cesarean delivery: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203:285

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors reported no conflict of interest. All of the authors had substantial contributions to conception, design, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data. The research was funded by the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ain Shams University, Building Number 112, El Marwa Tower, Walee EL Ahd Street, Hadayk EL-Kobba, Cairo, Egypt

    Moustafa I. Ibrahim, Gamal Farag Moustafa, Ahmed Sherif Abd Al-Hamid & May Raafat Hussein

Authors
  1. Moustafa I. Ibrahim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gamal Farag Moustafa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ahmed Sherif Abd Al-Hamid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. May Raafat Hussein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moustafa I. Ibrahim.

Additional information

Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov, NCT01713751.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ibrahim, M.I., Moustafa, G.F., Al-Hamid, A.S.A. et al. Superficial incisional surgical site infection rate after cesarean section in obese women: a randomized controlled trial of subcuticular versus interrupted skin suturing. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289, 981–986 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3098-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-3098-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation