Caesarean section surgical techniques (CORONIS): A fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial

125Citations
Citations of this article
262Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

1 unit) up to the 6-week follow-up visit. Women were analysed in the groups into which they were allocated. The CORONIS Trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials: ISRCTN31089967. Findings Between May 20, 2007, and Dec 31, 2010, 15â€̂935 women were recruited. There were no statistically significant differences within any of the intervention pairs for the primary outcome: blunt versus sharp entry risk ratio 1·03 (95% CI 0·91-1·17), exterior versus intra-abdominal repair 0·96 (0·84-1·08), single-layer versus double-layer closure 0·96 (0·85-1·08), closure versus non-closure 1·06 (0·94-1·20), and chromic catgut versus polyglactin-910 0·90 (0·78-1·04). 144 serious adverse events were reported, of which 26 were possibly related to the intervention. Most of the reported serious adverse events were known complications of surgery or complications of the reasons for the caesarean section. Interpretation These findings suggest that any of these surgical techniques is acceptable. However, longer-term follow-up is needed to assess whether the absence of evidence of short-term effects will translate into an absence of long-term effects. Funding UK Medical Research Council and WHO. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Brocklehurst, P., Abalos, E., Addo, V., El Sheikh, M., Mathews, J. E., Naz Masood, S., … Sharma, J. B. (2013). Caesarean section surgical techniques (CORONIS): A fractional, factorial, unmasked, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet, 382(9888), 234–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60441-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free