CORONIS - International study of caesarean section surgical techniques: the follow-up study
- PMID: 24261693
- PMCID: PMC4222281
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-215
CORONIS - International study of caesarean section surgical techniques: the follow-up study
Abstract
Background: The CORONIS Trial was a 2×2×2×2×2 non-regular, fractional, factorial trial of five pairs of alternative caesarean section surgical techniques on a range of short-term outcomes, the primary outcome being a composite of maternal death or infectious morbidity. The consequences of different surgical techniques on longer term outcomes have not been well assessed in previous studies. Such outcomes include those related to subsequent pregnancy: mode of delivery; abnormal placentation (e.g. accreta); postpartum hysterectomy, as well as longer term pelvic problems: pain, urinary problems, infertility. The Coronis Follow-up Study aims to measure and compare the incidence of these outcomes between the randomised groups at around three years after women participated in the CORONIS Trial.
Methods/design: This study will assess the following null hypotheses: In women who underwent delivery by caesarean section, no differences will be detected with respect to a range of long-term outcomes when comparing the following five pairs of alternative surgical techniques evaluated in the CORONIS Trial: 1. Blunt versus sharp abdominal entry. 2. Exteriorisation of the uterus for repair versus intra-abdominal repair. 3. Single versus double layer closure of the uterus. 4. Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum (pelvic and parietal). 5. Chromic catgut versus Polyglactin-910 for uterine repair. The outcomes will include (1) women's health: pelvic pain; dysmenorrhoea; deep dyspareunia; urinary symptoms; laparoscopy; hysterectomy; tubal/ovarian surgery; abdominal hernias; bowel obstruction; infertility; death. (2) Outcomes of subsequent pregnancies: inter-pregnancy interval; pregnancy outcome; gestation at delivery; mode of delivery; pregnancy complications; surgery during or following delivery.
Discussion: The results of this follow-up study will have importance for all pregnant women and for health professionals who provide care for pregnant women. Although the results will have been collected in seven countries with limited health care resources (Argentina, Chile, Ghana, India, Kenya, Pakistan, Sudan) any differences in outcomes associated with different surgical techniques are likely to be generalisable throughout the world.
Trial registration: ISRCTN31089967.
Similar articles
-
Caesarean section surgical techniques: 3 year follow-up of the CORONIS fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial.Lancet. 2016 Jul 2;388(10039):62-72. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00204-X. Epub 2016 May 4. Lancet. 2016. PMID: 27155903 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Caesarean section surgical techniques (CORONIS): a fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial.Lancet. 2013 Jul 20;382(9888):234-48. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60441-9. Epub 2013 May 28. Lancet. 2013. PMID: 23721753 Clinical Trial.
-
The CORONIS Trial. International study of caesarean section surgical techniques: a randomised fractional, factorial trial.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2007 Oct 22;7:24. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-7-24. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2007. PMID: 18336721 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
The impact of surgical therapies for inflammatory bowel disease on female fertility.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jul 23;7(7):CD012711. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012711.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 31334846 Free PMC article.
-
Uterine caesarean closure techniques affect ultrasound findings and maternal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BJOG. 2018 Aug;125(9):1097-1108. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.15048. Epub 2018 Jan 30. BJOG. 2018. PMID: 29215795
Cited by
-
The Case for Standardizing Cesarean Delivery Technique: Seeing the Forest for the Trees.Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Nov;136(5):972-980. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004120. Obstet Gynecol. 2020. PMID: 33030865 Free PMC article.
-
Indications for Cesarean Sections in Rural Nepal.J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016 Oct;66(Suppl 1):284-8. doi: 10.1007/s13224-016-0890-2. Epub 2016 May 3. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016. PMID: 27651618 Free PMC article.
-
Incidence of incisional hernia after cesarean delivery: a register-based cohort study.PLoS One. 2014 Sep 30;9(9):e108829. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108829. eCollection 2014. PLoS One. 2014. PMID: 25268746 Free PMC article.
-
Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section: short- and long-term outcomes.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Aug 11;2014(8):CD000163. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000163.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014. PMID: 25110856 Free PMC article.
-
Selecting and measuring optimal outcomes for randomised controlled trials in surgery.Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014 Mar;399(3):263-72. doi: 10.1007/s00423-013-1136-8. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014. PMID: 24233344 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- The Information Centre. 2010. http://www.ic.nhs.uk.
-
- Gates S, McKenzie-McHarg K, Hurley P. Effects of surgical techniques of caesarean section on maternal health. Fetal Matern Med Rev. 2001;12:105–137.
-
- Bamigboye AA, Hofmeyr GJ. Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum at cesarean section. The Cochrane Library. 2003. p. CD0003577. - PubMed
-
- Enkin MW, Wilkinson C. Single versus two layer suturing for closing the uterine incision at caesarean section. The Cochrane Library. 2002. p. CD000192. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical