Extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal cesarean section: a retrospective study

ABSTRACT

Objectives

To evaluate extraperitoneal cesarean section as a routine elective surgery.

Methods

In this retrospective study, 461 primiparas were divided into the extraperitoneal and transperitoneal cesarean section groups according to the operation type in a random, but non-blinded, manner. The outcome measures were intraoperative blood loss, operation duration, postoperative gas passage time, postoperative pain, postoperative complications, and neonatal indicators

Results

The operation duration of the extraperitoneal cesarean section group was significantly lower than that of the transperitoneal cesarean section group (P < 0.05). Compared to the transperitoneal cesarean section group, the extraperitoneal cesarean section group had neonates with higher birth weights and fewer neonatal transfers (P < 0.05). There was no difference in other maternal surgical or neonatal complications between the two groups.

Conclusion

While extraperitoneal cesarean section can be safely performed as a routine procedure in the surgical delivery of primiparas, it must be performed by well-trained surgeons. In view of its advantages, it is worth being promoted in senior general hospitals as a routine choice.

Abbreviations: CS: Cesarean section; ECS: Extraperitoneal; TCS: Transperitoneal; VAS: Visual analogue scale.

KEYWORDS:

• Cesarean section
• pregnancy
• primipara
• morbidity
• safety

Disclosure of financial/conflict of interest

This manuscript has not been published or presented elsewhere in part or in entirety and is not under consideration by another journal. We have read and understood your journal’s policies, and we believe that neither the manuscript nor the study violates any of these. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Ethics statement

This study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Qingdao Municipal Hospital Medical Ethics Committee. The research was performed in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations and all participants provided informed consent.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/00325481.2022.2124774

Additional information

Funding

No funding was received in the production of this manuscript..