These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

993 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28070914)

  • 1. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Di Spiezio Sardo A; Saccone G; McCurdy R; Bujold E; Bifulco G; Berghella V
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Nov; 50(5):578-583. PubMed ID: 28070914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Impact of single- vs double-layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and metaanalysis.
    Roberge S; Demers S; Berghella V; Chaillet N; Moore L; Bujold E
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2014 Nov; 211(5):453-60. PubMed ID: 24912096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Uterine caesarean closure techniques affect ultrasound findings and maternal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Stegwee SI; Jordans I; van der Voet LF; van de Ven PM; Ket J; Lambalk CB; de Groot C; Hehenkamp W; Huirne J
    BJOG; 2018 Aug; 125(9):1097-1108. PubMed ID: 29215795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Impact of uterine closure on residual myometrial thickness after cesarean: a randomized controlled trial.
    Roberge S; Demers S; Girard M; Vikhareva O; Markey S; Chaillet N; Moore L; Paris G; Bujold E
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2016 Apr; 214(4):507.e1-507.e6. PubMed ID: 26522861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Single versus double-layer uterine closure at cesarean: impact on lower uterine segment thickness at next pregnancy.
    Vachon-Marceau C; Demers S; Bujold E; Roberge S; Gauthier RJ; Pasquier JC; Girard M; Chaillet N; Boulvain M; Jastrow N
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2017 Jul; 217(1):65.e1-65.e5. PubMed ID: 28263751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A new technique for uterine incision closure at the time of cesarean section: does it make a difference?
    Elkhouly NI; Abdelaal NK; Solyman AE; Elkelani OA; Elbasueny BF; Elhalaby AF
    J Obstet Gynaecol; 2022 Apr; 42(3):416-423. PubMed ID: 34155957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Single- versus double-layer closure of the hysterotomy incision during cesarean delivery and risk of uterine rupture.
    Roberge S; Chaillet N; Boutin A; Moore L; Jastrow N; Brassard N; Gauthier RJ; Hudic I; Shipp TD; Weimar CH; Fatusic Z; Demers S; Bujold E
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2011 Oct; 115(1):5-10. PubMed ID: 21794864
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Single- versus double-layer closure of the caesarean (uterine) scar in the prevention of gynaecological symptoms in relation to niche development - the 2Close study: a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
    Stegwee SI; Jordans IPM; van der Voet LF; Bongers MY; de Groot CJM; Lambalk CB; de Leeuw RA; Hehenkamp WJK; van de Ven PM; Bosmans JE; Pajkrt E; Bakkum EA; Radder CM; Hemelaar M; van Baal WM; Visser H; van Laar JOEH; van Vliet HAAM; Rijnders RJP; Sueters M; Janssen CAH; Hermes W; Feitsma AH; Kapiteijn K; Scheepers HCJ; Langenveld J; de Boer K; Coppus SFPJ; Schippers DH; Oei ALM; Kaplan M; Papatsonis DNM; de Vleeschouwer LHM; van Beek E; Bekker MN; Huisjes AJM; Meijer WJ; Deurloo KL; Boormans EMA; van Eijndhoven HWF; Huirne JAF
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2019 Mar; 19(1):85. PubMed ID: 30832681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Longitudinal transvaginal ultrasound evaluation of cesarean scar niche incidence and depth in the first two years after single- or double-layer uterotomy closure: a randomized controlled trial.
    Bamberg C; Hinkson L; Dudenhausen JW; Bujak V; Kalache KD; Henrich W
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2017 Dec; 96(12):1484-1489. PubMed ID: 28832909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Hysterotomy level at Cesarean section and occurrence of large scar defects: a randomized single-blind trial.
    Vikhareva O; Rickle GS; Lavesson T; Nedopekina E; Brandell K; Salvesen KÅ
    Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Apr; 53(4):438-442. PubMed ID: 30484920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Single-layer vs double-layer uterine closure during cesarean delivery: 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2Close study).
    Verberkt C; Stegwee SI; Van der Voet LF; Van Baal WM; Kapiteijn K; Geomini PMAJ; Van Eekelen R; de Groot CJM; de Leeuw RA; Huirne JAF;
    Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2024 Sep; 231(3):346.e1-346.e11. PubMed ID: 38154502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Systematic review of cesarean scar assessment in the nonpregnant state: imaging techniques and uterine scar defect.
    Roberge S; Boutin A; Chaillet N; Moore L; Jastrow N; Demers S; Bujold E
    Am J Perinatol; 2012 Jun; 29(6):465-71. PubMed ID: 22399223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Barbed vs conventional suture at cesarean delivery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Agarwal S; D'Souza R; Ryu M; Maxwell C
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2021 Jun; 100(6):1010-1018. PubMed ID: 33404082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Hydrosonographic assessment of the effects of 2 different suturing techniques on healing of the uterine scar after cesarean delivery.
    Sevket O; Ates S; Molla T; Ozkal F; Uysal O; Dansuk R
    Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2014 Jun; 125(3):219-22. PubMed ID: 24680843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The association of endometrial closure during cesarean section to the risk of developing uterine scar defect: a randomized control trial.
    Mohr-Sasson A; Castel E; Dadon T; Brandt A; Etinger R; Cohen A; Zajicek M; Haas J; Mashiach R
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2024 May; 309(5):2063-2070. PubMed ID: 38498161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Impact of purse-string uterine suture on scar healing after a cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial.
    Halouani A; Dimassi K; Ben Mansour A; Triki A
    Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM; 2023 Jul; 5(7):100992. PubMed ID: 37127211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of caesarean section.
    Dodd JM; Anderson ER; Gates S; Grivell RM
    Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2014 Jul; 2014(7):CD004732. PubMed ID: 25048608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Ultrasound cesarean scar assessment one year postpartum in relation to one- or two-layer uterine suture closure.
    Hanacek J; Vojtech J; Urbankova I; Krcmar M; Křepelka P; Feyereisl J; Krofta L
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2020 Jan; 99(1):69-78. PubMed ID: 31441500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Evaluation of cesarean scar after single- and double-layer hysterotomy closure: a prospective cross-sectional study.
    Tekiner NB; Çetin BA; Türkgeldi LS; Yılmaz G; Polat İ; Gedikbaşı A
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2018 May; 297(5):1137-1143. PubMed ID: 29397441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Impact of Hysterotomy Closure Technique on Subsequent Cesarean Scar Defects Formation: A Systematic Review.
    Genovese F; Schiattarella A; D'Urso G; Vitale SG; Carugno J; Verzì G; D'Urso V; Iacono E; Siringo S; Leanza V; Palumbo M
    Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2023; 88(2):81-90. PubMed ID: 36724750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 50.