![The World Congress on Controversies in Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility (COGI). Click here to learn more.]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/112382/JournalAd-COGI2024-Leaderboard.jpg"})
References
- Blanco J. D., Gibbs R. S. Infections following classical cesarean section. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1979; 55: 167–169
- Dewhurst C. J. Reports of societies. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the British Empire 1956; 63: 125–129
- Goodlin R. C. In defense of the vertical uterine incision. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1986; 154: 966–967
- Haddad N. G., Irvine D. S. Classical versus lower segment caesarean section in very pre-term deliveries. Lancet 1988; 1: 762
- Halperin M. E., Moore D. C., Hannah W. J. Classical versus low-segment transverse incision for preterm caesarean section: maternal complications and outcome of subsequent pregnancies. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1988; 95: 990–996
- Jovanovic R. Incisions of the pregnant uterus and delivery of low-birth weight infants. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1985; 152: 971–974
- Pedowitz P., Schwartz R. M. The true incidence of silent scar rupture of cesarean section scars. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1957; 74: 1071–1081
- Schutterman E. B., Grimes D. A. Comparative safety of the low transverse versus the low vertical uterine incision for cesarean delivery of breech infants. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1983; 61: 593–597
- Shah Y. G., Ronner W., Eckl C. J., Stinson S. K. Acute maternal morbidity following classical cesarean delivery of the preterm infant. Obstetrics and Gynecology 1990; 76: 16–19