Abstract
To the Editors:
We appreciate the thoughtful and constructive feedback on our recent article “Single-layer vs double-layer uterine closure during cesarean delivery: 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2Close study).”1,2 The insights provided by the author align with our own reflections, particularly regarding the high incidence of gynecological symptoms after cesarean sections (CSs). Indeed, while our study found no significant differences in obstetrical complications between single- and double-layer uterine closure, the prevalence of these symptoms warrants a reexamination of current techniques. [...]
We appreciate the thoughtful and constructive feedback on our recent article “Single-layer vs double-layer uterine closure during cesarean delivery: 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2Close study).”1,2 The insights provided by the author align with our own reflections, particularly regarding the high incidence of gynecological symptoms after cesarean sections (CSs). Indeed, while our study found no significant differences in obstetrical complications between single- and double-layer uterine closure, the prevalence of these symptoms warrants a reexamination of current techniques. [...]
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | e109-e110 |
| Journal | American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| Volume | 232 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - Mar 2025 |
Bibliographical note
© 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Should we focus on endometrial-free closure technique?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver