Comparison the Results of the Joel-Cohen’s Incision and the Pfannenstiel’s Incision for Caesarean Section Cha-Am Hospital, Phetchaburi
Keywords:
Caesarean section, Joel-Cohen incision, Pfannenstiel incisionAbstract
Objective: The results of the Joel-Cohen’s incision and the Pfannenstiel’s incision for caesarean section were compared with regard to total time required for performing operations, estimated intraoperative blood loss, duration of first time of individuals receiving analgesics and quantity of individuals receiving analgesics within 24 hours.
Method: In a retrospective study design, 321 women with gestational, requiring cesarean section, were assigned to either Pfannenstiel incision or Joel-Cohen incision for entry into the peritoneal cavity. The primary outcome measure was total time required for performing operation and secondary outcome measures were estimated intraoperative blood loss, duration of first time of individuals receiving analgesics, quantity of individuals receiving pethidine, and other postoperative data. Exclusion criteria were previous cesarean section and previous gynecological surgery.
Results: Mean age of patients who underwent Pfannenstiel incision and Joel-Cohen incision were 26.7±7.2 and 25.1±6.8 years, respectively. The mean total operation time in Joel-Cohen incision was significantly shorter than Pfannenstiel incision(26.3±4.2 vs 34.6±5.7 min, p < .005). The duration of first time and quantity of individuals receiving pethidine were similar between the two techniques. The estimated intraoperative blood loss of Pfannenstiel incision was significantly more than of Joel-Cohen incision (463.2±261.9 and 372.1±186.8 ml, respectively; p< .005).
Conclusion: Joel-Cohen incision is a faster technique for caesarean section with less intraoperative blood loss. The duration of first time and quantity of individuals receiving pethidine were similar between the two techniques.
References
2. Wagner M. Choosing caesarean section. Lancet 2000; 356(9242):1677-80.
3. วิโรจน์ ตั้งเจริญเสถียร, งามจิตต์ จัทรสาธิต, ชลลดา สิทธิทูรย์. ลักษณะการคลอดในโรงพยาบาลในประเทศไทย ปี 2533-2539. นนทบุรี. สถาบันวิจัยสาธารณสุข. 2541.
4. Suwannarurk K, Manusook S, Pongrojpaw D. Current Abdominal Incision for Obstetrics and Gynecologic Surgery. Tham Med J 2012;12:547-60.
5. Franchi M, Ghezzi F, Balestreri D. A randomized clinical trial of two surgical techniques for cesarean section. Am J Perinatol 1998;15:589-94.
6. Dumas AM, Girard R, Ayzac L. Maternal infection rates after cesarean delivery by Pfannenstiel or Joel-Cohen incision: a multicenter surveillance study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;147:139-43.
7. Wallin G, Fall O. Modified Joel-Cohen technique for caesarean delivery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:221-6.
8. Abuelghar WM, El-Bishry G, Emam LH. Caesarean deliveries by Pfannenstiel versus Joel-Cohen incision: A randomised controlled trial. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2013;14:194-200.
9. Saha SP, Bhattarcharjee N, Das Mahanta S. A randomized comparative study on modified Joel-Cohen incision versus Pfannenstiel incision for cesarean section. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2013;14:28-34.
10. Olyaeemanesh A, Bavandpour E, Mobinizadeh M. Comparison of the Joel-Cohen-based technique and the transverse Pfannenstiel for caesarean section for safety and effectiveness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2017;31:54.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
ลิขสิทธิ์บทความเป็นของผู้เขียนบทความ แต่หากผลงานของท่านได้รับการพิจารณาตีพิมพ์ลงวารสารแพทย์เขต 4-5 จะคงไว้ซึ่งสิทธิ์ในการตีพิมพ์ครั้งแรกด้วยเหตุที่บทความจะปรากฎในวารสารที่เข้าถึงได้ จึงอนุญาตให้นำบทความในวารสารไปใช้ประโยชน์ได้ในเชิงวิชาการโดยจำเป็นต้องมีการอ้างอิงถึงชื่อวารสารอย่างถูกต้อง แต่ไม่อนุญาตให้นำไปใช้ในเชิงพาณิชย์
