An interventional study of Non-Locking Uterine Closure and Locked Uterine Closure in Cesarean Section Complications, Uterine Scar Diverticulum and Uterine Scar From Previous Cesarean Delivery, sponsored by Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada. Completed at 1 site in Canada. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-01-25.
Sponsored by Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada · Not applicable, Interventional, and Prevention
Cesarean section accounts for nearly 30% of births in Canada, and is the most commonly performed surgery by Obstetrician Gynecologists. Cesarean scar isthmocele, meaning a defect in the uterine wall at the site of a previous uterine incision, is a common complication of this surgery. While most are likely asymptomatic, isthmoceles can lead to major complications in pregnancy (uterine rupture, invasive placentation, cesarean scar ectopic pregnancy) and outside of pregnancy (abnormal uterine bleeding, infertility and pain). Studies have shown that the method used to suture the uterus at the time of a cesarean section may have an impact on the incidence of post-operative isthmocele formation. Our study is a randomized control trial of the impact of locked vs unlocked uterine closure at cesarean section on the incidence of isthmocele formation. Women undergoing cesarean section will be randomized to have either a locked or unlocked uterine closure. They will then return 6 months after their surgery for a transvaginal ultrasound to evaluate the presence or absence of an isthmocele.
This study is a pilot trial. The investigators hope to determine the feasibility of completing a large randomized control trial by recording: a) the number of patient who agree to participate in this study, b) the number of patients who receive the correct intervention and, c) the number of patients who return for their post operative ultrasound.
The investigators also plan to assess multiple secondary outcomes. First, the goal is to determine the isthmocele incidence within the study subjects of the pilot trial in order to perform a power calculation for a subsequent larger trial in this area. Another goal is to determine if the uterine closure techniques in this study lead to differences in surgical time, blood loss or the need for intra- or post-operative blood transfusion. Last, the study will collect data on the suture material most commonly used in this study to determine if this requires standardization in the subsequent larger trial.
Cesarean section accounts for nearly 30% of all deliveries in Canada, and is the most commonly performed surgery by Obstetrician Gynecologists (OBGYNs) in Canada. Therefore, it is important to understand the short and long-term complications of this procedure. Recently, emphasis has been placed on cesarean scar isthmocele as a long-term complication. An isthmocele is a defect at the cesarean section scar site with a depth of at least 1-2mm. Isthmoceles can lead to major obstetrical complications such as cesarean scar pregnancy, invasive placentation, and uterine rupture. More commonly, patients present with gynecologic symptoms: abnormal uterine bleeding, pain, and infertility. Up to 30-50% of patients with an isthmocele report symptoms when inquired. Isthmoceles have an incidence of 19-88% following cesarean section. This wide range is due to discrepancies in study technique, diagnostic criteria, and patient characteristics.
While medical and surgical treatment options are available for cesarean scar isthmocele, our focus should turn to prevention at the time of cesarean section. Evidence suggests double-layer (vs. single-layer) uterine closure decreases the formation of cesarean scar isthmocele and increases residual myometrial thickness (RMT). Additionally, uterine closure with a locked suturing technique may result in greater isthmocele depth and size, and a thinner RMT at the cesarean scar site. To our knowledge however, no study has determined the impact of a locked vs. unlocked double-layer closure technique on isthmocele prevention. Locked sutures, believed to be more hemostatic, may cause tissue necrosis and impair wound healing. Interestingly, evidence does not support reductions in operative blood loss with locked closure techniques. The hypothesis is that unlocked double-layer uterine closure can reduce isthmocele formation and thus improve longterm maternal outcomes without impacting operative blood loss or other short-term surgical outcomes.
611 studies on the registry are indexed under Cicatrix; 114 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 41 is close to the median of 40 across 512 interventional studies indexed under Cicatrix.
Browse Cicatrix studies →Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada is the lead sponsor of 158 studies on the registry; 32 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Participants will undergo two-layer closure of the hysterotomy site at the time of cesarean section. The first layer will use a running \& locking technique. The second layer will be performed based on surgeon preference.
Procedure: Locked Uterine Closure
Participants will undergo two-layer closure of the hysterotomy site at the time of cesarean section. The first layer will use a running \& non-locking technique. The second layer will be performed based on surgeon preference, but cannot be of a locking technique.
Procedure: Non-Locking Uterine Closure
The first layer of the two-layer uterine closure will be sutured with a running \& non-locking technique. The second layer cannot be of a locking technique.
The first layer of the two-layer uterine closure will be sutured with a running \& locking technique. The second layer can be locking or non-locking.
Number of Participants Enrolled
Number of potential participants approached who actually enrolled in the trial
Time frame: 6 months
Number of Participants that Cross-Over
Number of participants who cross-over to the other study arm (i.e. who receive the incorrect uterine closure technique)
Time frame: 6 months
Number of Participants Lost to Follow Up
Number of participants enrolled in the trial who do not present for their follow up ultrasound at 6 months.
Time frame: 6 months
Incidence of Isthmocele
The presence of an isthmocele (minimum 2 mm x 2 mm) identified on a transvaginal ultrasound 6 months after the cesarean section
Time frame: 6 months
Estimated Blood Loss
Number of mL of blood lost at the time of cesarean section
Time frame: Through surgery completion (estimated 1 hour)
Change in Hemoglobin
Change in Hgb from pre-operative measurement to Hgb measurement on post-operative day #1
Time frame: 24 hours
Operative Time
Length of surgery (minutes)
Time frame: Through surgery completion (estimated 1 hour)
Number of Blood Transfusions
Number of intraoperative and post-operative blood transfusions given to each participant
Time frame: Throughout hospital stay (estimated 48 hours)
Additional Hemostatic Sutures
Number of additional hemostatic sutures placed in the uterus for each participant
Time frame: Start to end of surgery
Suture Material
Type of suture material used for hysterotomy closure
Time frame: 6 months
Use of Additional Oxytocin in Units
Number of units of additional oxytocin given to each participant as a uterotonic agent (beyond usual dose of intraoperative oxytocin)
Time frame: Throughout hospital stay (estimated 48 hours)
Use of Ergotamine in mg
Number of mg Ergotamine used as a uterotonic agent, if required
Time frame: Throughout hospital stay (estimated 48 hours)
Use of Hemabate in mg
Number of mg Ergotamine used as a uterotonic agent, if required
Time frame: Throughout hospital stay (estimated 48 hours)
Use of Misoprostol in mcg
Number of mcg Misoprostol used as a uterotonic agent, if required
Time frame: Throughout hospital stay (estimated 48 hours)
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada →