open access
Optimization of the cosmetic appearance of skin scar after caesarean section — part I: obstetric practice
, 2, 2, 2
Affiliations- Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Provincial Combined Hospital, Kielce, Poland, Poland
- Jan Kochanowski University in Kielce, Poland, Poland
open access
Abstract
Caesarean section (CS) is a surgical way of child delivery by cutting the abdomen and uterus. Although compared to natural childbirth, it carries a greater risk of complications, the percentage of performed cuts is still increasing. The consequence of this procedure is the surgical skin scar. The appearance of this scar depends on many factors, including appropriate pre- and intraoperative procedure, operator skills and experience. The aim of the work is to present actions aimed at increasing the aesthetics of the skin scar after CS including pre-, intra- and postoperative procedures.
Abstract
Caesarean section (CS) is a surgical way of child delivery by cutting the abdomen and uterus. Although compared to natural childbirth, it carries a greater risk of complications, the percentage of performed cuts is still increasing. The consequence of this procedure is the surgical skin scar. The appearance of this scar depends on many factors, including appropriate pre- and intraoperative procedure, operator skills and experience. The aim of the work is to present actions aimed at increasing the aesthetics of the skin scar after CS including pre-, intra- and postoperative procedures.
Keywords
skin scar; caesarean section; wound healing
About this articleTitle
Optimization of the cosmetic appearance of skin scar after caesarean section — part I: obstetric practice
Journal
Issue
Article type
Review paper
Pages
754-758
Published online
2023-04-17
Page views
439
Article views/downloads
516
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Ginekol Pol 2023;94(9):754-758.
Keywords
skin scar
caesarean section
wound healing
Authors
Daniel P. Wolder
Grzegorz M. Swiercz
Agata Michalska
Justyna Pogorzelska
References (42)- Bagłaj M, Bagłaj M. Blizny jako problem kliniczny w praktyce dermatologa estetycznego. Dermatol Estet. 2014; 16(2): 80–85.
- Stanirowski P, Sawicki W. Nowoczesne metody terapii trudno gojących się położniczo-ginekologicznych ran pooperacyjnych – analiza przydatności i skuteczności stosowania. Post Nauk Med. 2013; 26(7): 475–487.
- Kokanalı D, Kokanalı MK, Topcu HO, et al. Are the cesarean section skin scar characteristics associated with intraabdominal adhesions located at surgical and non-surgical sites. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019; 48(10): 839–843.
- Elprince M, Taha OT, Ibrahim ZM, et al. Prediction of intraperitoneal adhesions using striae gravidarum and scar characteristics in women undergoing repeated cesarean sections. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021; 21(1): 286.
- Knight J, Escobar PF. Strategie zmierzające do zminimalizowania powikłań w trakcie gojenia się rany pooperacyjnej. Ginekol Dypl. 2012; 6: 33–38.
- Kawakita T, Landy HJ. Surgical site infections after cesarean delivery: epidemiology, prevention and treatment. Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2017; 3: 12.
- Różańska A, Jarynowski A, Kopeć-Godlewska K, et al. Polish Society of Hospital Infections Team. Does surgical site infection after Caesarean section in Polish hospitals reflect high-quality patient care or poor postdischarge surveillance? Results from a 3-year multicenter study. Am J Infect Control. 2018; 46(1): 20–25.
- Pomorski M, Woytoń R, Woytoń P, et al. Cięcia cesarskie a porody siłami natury – aktualne spojrzenie. Ginekol Pol. 2010; 81: 347–351.
- Welsh Healthcare Associated Infection Programme (WHAIP). Caesarean Section Surgical Site Wound Care and Management Public Health Wales 2015.
- Tanner J, Norrie P, Melen K. Preoperative hair removal to reduce surgical site infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011(11): CD004122.
- Webster J, Osborne S. Preoperative bathing or showering with skin antiseptics to prevent surgical site infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015.
- Chlebicki MP, Safdar N, O'Horo JC, et al. Preoperative chlorhexidine shower or bath for prevention of surgical site infection: a meta-analysis. Am J Infect Control. 2013; 41(2): 167–173.
- Smaill FM, Gyte GMl. Antibiotic prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis for preventing infection after cesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010(1): CD007482.
- Mackeen AD, Packard RE, Ota E, et al. Timing of intravenous prophylactic antibiotics for preventing postpartum infectious morbidity in women undergoing cesarean delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014(12): CD009516.
- Jyothirmayi CA, Halder A, Yadav B, et al. A randomized controlled double blind trial comparing the effects of the prophylactic antibiotic, Cefazolin, administered at caesarean delivery at two different timings (before skin incision and after cord clamping) on both the mother and newborn. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017; 17(1): 340.
- WHO Guidelines Development Group. Global Guidelines for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection. WHO, Geneva 2016: 15–21.
- Hadiati DR, Hakimi M, Nurdiati DS, et al. Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 10(9): CD007462.
- Huang H, Li G, Wang H, et al. Optimal skin antiseptic agents for prevention of surgical site infection in cesarean section: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018; 31(24): 3267–3274.
- Caissutti C, Saccone G, Zullo F, et al. Vaginal Cleansing Before Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 130(3): 527–538.
- Aref NK. Vaginal cleansing prior to caesarian section: To do or not to do?: A randomized trial. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019; 48(1): 65–68.
- Haas DM, Morgan S, Contreras K, et al. Vaginal preparation with antiseptic solution before cesarean section for preventing postoperative infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 7(1): CD007892.
- Bolla D, Schöning A, Drack G, et al. Technical aspects of the cesarean section. Gynecological Surgery. 2010; 7(2): 127–132.
- Vitale SG, Marilli I, Cignini P, et al. Comparison between modified Misgav-Ladach and Pfannenstiel-Kerr techniques for Cesarean section: review of literature. J Prenat Med. 2014; 8(3-4): 36–41.
- Gizzo S, Andrisani A, Noventa M, et al. Caesarean section: could different transverse abdominal incision techniques influence postpartum pain and subsequent quality of life? A systematic review. PLoS One. 2015; 10(2): e0114190.
- Hofmeyr GJ, Mathai M. Techniques for caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2004.
- Karanth KL, Sathish N. Review of advantages of Joel-Cohen surgical abdominal incision in caesarean section: a basic science perspective. Med J Malaysia. 2010; 65(3): 204–208.
- Loos MJ, Scheltinga MR, Mulders LG, et al. The Pfannenstiel incision as a source of chronic pain. Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 111(4): 839–846.
- Şahin N, Genc M, Turan GA, et al. A comparison of 2 cesarean section methods, modified Misgav-Ladach and Pfannenstiel-Kerr: A randomized controlled study. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2018; 27(3): 357–361.
- Ulubay M, Öztürk M, Fidan U, et al. Skin incision lengths in caesarean section. Cukurova Medical Journal. 2016; 41(1): 82.
- Sutton A. 548: Impact of cesarean skin incision length on post-operative wound complications. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018; 218(1): S327–S328.
- Ogawa R, Akaishi S, Huang C, et al. Clinical applications of basic research that shows reducing skin tension could prevent and treat abnormal scarring: the importance of fascial/subcutaneous tensile reduction sutures and flap surgery for keloid and hypertrophic scar reconstruction. J Nippon Med Sch. 2011; 78(2): 68–76.
- Poprzeczny AJ, Grivell RM, Louise J, et al. Skin and subcutaneous fascia closure at caesarean section to reduce wound complications: the closure randomised trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020; 20(1): 606.
- Dahlke JD, Mendez-Figueroa H, Rouse DJ, et al. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery: an updated systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209(4): 294–306.
- Dhama V, Chaudhary R, Singh S, et al. Three techniques for skin closure in caesarean section (stapler, absorbable subcuticular, non-absorbable subcuticular suture). Indian J Obstet Gynecol Res. 2016; 3(1): 68–72.
- Aabakke AJM, Krebs L, Pipper CB, et al. Subcuticular suture compared with staples for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 122(4): 878–884.
- Kwon JiY, Yun HG, Park InY. n-Butyl-2-cyanoacrylate tissue adhesive (Histoacryl) vs. subcuticular sutures for skin closure of Pfannenstiel incisions following cesarean delivery. PLoS One. 2018; 13(9): e0202074.
- Daykan Y, Sharon-Weiner M, Pasternak Y, et al. Skin closure at cesarean delivery, glue vs subcuticular sutures: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 216(4): 406.e1–406.e5.
- Mosoń K. Rana po cięciu cesarskim – jak zmniejszyć ryzyko nieprawidłowego gojenia? Post N Med. 2016; 29(7): 448–451.
- Zuarez-Easton S, Zafran N, Garmi G, et al. Postcesarean wound infection: prevalence, impact, prevention, and management challenges. Int J Womens Health. 2017; 9: 81–88.
- Zarei M, Rostami F, Bozorghnejad M, et al. Effect of Self-care Training Program on Surgical Incision Wound Healing in Women Undergoing Cesarean Section: A Quasi-Experimental Study. Med Surg Nurs J. 2021; 9(4): e108800.
- Kilic GS, Demirdag E, Findik MF, et al. Impact of timing on wound dressing removal after caesarean delivery: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2021; 41(3): 348–352.
- Peleg D, Eberstark E, Warsof SL, et al. Early wound dressing removal after scheduled cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 215(3): 388.e1–388.e5.
