A randomized study of closure of the peritoneum at cesarean delivery

Abstract

This study was conducted to test the hypothesis that nonclosure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum during low transverse cervical cesarean delivery is not associated with increased intraoperative or immediate postoperative complications. One hundred thirteen patients scheduled for low transverse cervical cesarean were randomized to either closure of both the visceral and parietal peritoneum with absorbable suture (N = 59) or no peritoneal closure (N = 54). Patients were cared for in the usual postoperative manner without reference to treatment group. There were no demographic differences between the groups and no differences in method(s) of anesthesia, operative indication(s), or use of peripartum epidural narcotics. The incidence of fever, endometritis, or wound infection was similar between groups. There were no differences in the number of patients requiring parenteral narcotic analgesia or in the number of doses per patient. The number of oral analgesic doses was significantly greater with closure than without (P = .014). The frequency with which postoperative ileus was diagnosed in each group was similar, and there was no difference regarding the day on which patients were advanced to liquid or select diets. Bowel stimulants were administered more frequently to the closure than to non-closure patients (P = .03). The average operating time was shorter for the open group than for the closure group (P less than .005). We conclude that non-closure of the visceral and parietal peritoneum at low transverse cervical cesarean delivery appears to have no adverse effect on immediate postoperative recovery, may decrease postoperative narcotic requirements, allows less complicated return of bowel function, and provides a simplified and shorter surgical procedure.