Cargando…

Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify and review associations between the types of sutures used for uterine compression suture (UCS) and its outcomes in postpartum hemorrhage. METHODS: An electronic search using PubMed and Scopus databases was performed. We included the English articles reported...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Matsuzaki, Shinya, Jitsumori, Mariko, Hara, Takeya, Matsuzaki, Satoko, Nakagawa, Satoshi, Miyake, Tatsuya, Takiuchi, Tsuyoshi, Kakigano, Aiko, Kobayashi, Eiji, Tomimatsu, Takuji, Kimura, Tadashi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6916157/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31842850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0660-z
_version_ 1783480172652003328
author Matsuzaki, Shinya
Jitsumori, Mariko
Hara, Takeya
Matsuzaki, Satoko
Nakagawa, Satoshi
Miyake, Tatsuya
Takiuchi, Tsuyoshi
Kakigano, Aiko
Kobayashi, Eiji
Tomimatsu, Takuji
Kimura, Tadashi
author_facet Matsuzaki, Shinya
Jitsumori, Mariko
Hara, Takeya
Matsuzaki, Satoko
Nakagawa, Satoshi
Miyake, Tatsuya
Takiuchi, Tsuyoshi
Kakigano, Aiko
Kobayashi, Eiji
Tomimatsu, Takuji
Kimura, Tadashi
author_sort Matsuzaki, Shinya
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify and review associations between the types of sutures used for uterine compression suture (UCS) and its outcomes in postpartum hemorrhage. METHODS: An electronic search using PubMed and Scopus databases was performed. We included the English articles reported from January 1, 1997, to May 31, 2017, using search words or terms regarding the types of suture and needle used for UCSs. We only included studies describing the sutures in the systematic review. RESULTS: We found 196 studies and included 76 (38.8%) in our analysis. We collected data on maternal outcomes for 924 patients and categorized them. Of the 76 studies, suture sizes 0, 1, and 2 were used in 6, 44, and 32 articles, respectively (some studies used multiple sutures). Of the 45 studies mentioning the needles, curved and straight needles were used in 35 and 10, respectively. The results of our review revealed that about 80% of previous articles used Catgut and Polyglactin 910 sutures. Because no studies that compared the efficacy of different size of sutures were identified, we investigated the differences using the cases reported in previous studies mentioned above. In the first analysis, we compared the uterine preservation rate between size 1 and size 2 sutures. We found no significant difference in uterine preservation rate (92.8%: size 1 vs. 94.2%: size 2, p > 0.05) but found significant difference in transfusion rate (62.4% vs. 79.1%, p < 0.01). With the hypothesis that non-transfusion cases were less severe, we excluded these cases from second analysis. Although our second analysis of only Catgut or Polyglactin showed strong selection bias, we observed that uterine preservation rate was significantly higher in cases with size 2 suture than in those with size 1 suture (86.9% vs. 93.5%, p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review showed that approximately 80% of cases were treated by Catgut and Polyglactin 910. Due to the heterogeneity of cases included in this review, it is difficult to estimate which suture is better for UCSs. More robust studies are necessary to enable the identification of the superior suture for performing UCSs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6916157
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69161572019-12-30 Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review Matsuzaki, Shinya Jitsumori, Mariko Hara, Takeya Matsuzaki, Satoko Nakagawa, Satoshi Miyake, Tatsuya Takiuchi, Tsuyoshi Kakigano, Aiko Kobayashi, Eiji Tomimatsu, Takuji Kimura, Tadashi BMC Surg Research Article BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify and review associations between the types of sutures used for uterine compression suture (UCS) and its outcomes in postpartum hemorrhage. METHODS: An electronic search using PubMed and Scopus databases was performed. We included the English articles reported from January 1, 1997, to May 31, 2017, using search words or terms regarding the types of suture and needle used for UCSs. We only included studies describing the sutures in the systematic review. RESULTS: We found 196 studies and included 76 (38.8%) in our analysis. We collected data on maternal outcomes for 924 patients and categorized them. Of the 76 studies, suture sizes 0, 1, and 2 were used in 6, 44, and 32 articles, respectively (some studies used multiple sutures). Of the 45 studies mentioning the needles, curved and straight needles were used in 35 and 10, respectively. The results of our review revealed that about 80% of previous articles used Catgut and Polyglactin 910 sutures. Because no studies that compared the efficacy of different size of sutures were identified, we investigated the differences using the cases reported in previous studies mentioned above. In the first analysis, we compared the uterine preservation rate between size 1 and size 2 sutures. We found no significant difference in uterine preservation rate (92.8%: size 1 vs. 94.2%: size 2, p > 0.05) but found significant difference in transfusion rate (62.4% vs. 79.1%, p < 0.01). With the hypothesis that non-transfusion cases were less severe, we excluded these cases from second analysis. Although our second analysis of only Catgut or Polyglactin showed strong selection bias, we observed that uterine preservation rate was significantly higher in cases with size 2 suture than in those with size 1 suture (86.9% vs. 93.5%, p = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review showed that approximately 80% of cases were treated by Catgut and Polyglactin 910. Due to the heterogeneity of cases included in this review, it is difficult to estimate which suture is better for UCSs. More robust studies are necessary to enable the identification of the superior suture for performing UCSs. BioMed Central 2019-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC6916157/ /pubmed/31842850 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0660-z Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Matsuzaki, Shinya
Jitsumori, Mariko
Hara, Takeya
Matsuzaki, Satoko
Nakagawa, Satoshi
Miyake, Tatsuya
Takiuchi, Tsuyoshi
Kakigano, Aiko
Kobayashi, Eiji
Tomimatsu, Takuji
Kimura, Tadashi
Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
title Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
title_full Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
title_fullStr Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
title_short Systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
title_sort systematic review on the needle and suture types for uterine compression sutures: a literature review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6916157/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31842850
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12893-019-0660-z
work_keys_str_mv AT matsuzakishinya systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT jitsumorimariko systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT haratakeya systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT matsuzakisatoko systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT nakagawasatoshi systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT miyaketatsuya systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT takiuchitsuyoshi systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT kakiganoaiko systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT kobayashieiji systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT tomimatsutakuji systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview
AT kimuratadashi systematicreviewontheneedleandsuturetypesforuterinecompressionsuturesaliteraturereview