Objective assessment of cesarean section suturing techniques using a uterine simulator

Cesarean wound healing is influenced by surgeon experience, suture type, and technique. This study utilized a simulation model to quantify these effects. Obstetricians-gynecologists and junior residents performed two-layer continuous suturing on uterine models, forming eight groups based on experience level (expert, novice), suture type (conventional, barbed), and technique (Albert-Lembert, layer-to-layer). The ideal wound condition was defined as that achieved by an expert using barbed sutures and the layer-to-layer technique. Wound characteristics were quantified and compared to this ideal. Experts using barbed sutures in Albert-Lembert suturing showed higher wound density but greater deformation and larger endometrial openings (both P < 0.01). Novices using barbed sutures in Albert-Lembert suturing showed similar wound density but significantly greater deformation and opening (both P < 0.01). Novices using conventional sutures in layer-to-layer suturing showed the lowest wound density and longest suturing time (both P < 0.01). Notably, novices using barbed sutures achieved wound characteristics comparable to experts using conventional sutures in Albert-Lembert suturing and results closer to the ideal in layer-to-layer suturing. These findings establish a quantifiable standard for cesarean suturing and suggest that optimizing suture types and techniques may help compensate for differences in surgical expertise.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-02-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-37041-9
Primary Topic
Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Objective assessment of cesarean section suturing techniques using a uterine simulator

Hikaru Ooba, Eriko Eto, Chiaki Kuriyama, Satoe Kirino et al.
Scientific Reports
Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
article

Objective assessment of cesarean section suturing techniques using a uterine simulator

Hikaru Ooba, Eriko Eto, Chiaki Kuriyama, Satoe Kirino, Sakurako Mishima, Ayano Suemori, Keiichi Oishi, Akiko Ohira, Hikari Nakato, S. Sakata, Masakazu Kato, Tomohiro MITOMA, Hisashi Masuyama, Jota Maki
article en

Abstract

Cesarean wound healing is influenced by surgeon experience, suture type, and technique. This study utilized a simulation model to quantify these effects. Obstetricians-gynecologists and junior residents performed two-layer continuous suturing on uterine models, forming eight groups based on experience level (expert, novice), suture type (conventional, barbed), and technique (Albert-Lembert, layer-to-layer). The ideal wound condition was defined as that achieved by an expert using barbed sutures and the layer-to-layer technique. Wound characteristics were quantified and compared to this ideal. Experts using barbed sutures in Albert-Lembert suturing showed higher wound density but greater deformation and larger endometrial openings (both P < 0.01). Novices using barbed sutures in Albert-Lembert suturing showed similar wound density but significantly greater deformation and opening (both P < 0.01). Novices using conventional sutures in layer-to-layer suturing showed the lowest wound density and longest suturing time (both P < 0.01). Notably, novices using barbed sutures achieved wound characteristics comparable to experts using conventional sutures in Albert-Lembert suturing and results closer to the ideal in layer-to-layer suturing. These findings establish a quantifiable standard for cesarean suturing and suggest that optimizing suture types and techniques may help compensate for differences in surgical expertise.

Scientific ReportsVol. 16(1)
Okayama University (JP), Tohoku University (JP), Fujitsu (Japan) (JP), Okayama University Hospital (JP), Chugoku Central Hospital (JP)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Surgical Sutures and Adhesives
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.