Refacerea facilitată după operaţia cezariană (ERAS), recomandări preoperatorii şi intraoperatorii

 Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) – preoperative and intraoperative recommendations for caesarean delivery

First published: 17 decembrie 2019

Editorial Group: MEDICHUB MEDIA

DOI: 10.26416/ObsGin.67.4.2019.2761


Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a standardized concept used to include all the measures taken pre-, intra- and postoperatively to reduce morbidity and facilitate early recovery. It is a paradigm shift that involves multidisciplinary approach of the surgical patient and comprises a series of measures that should optimize recovery and shorten hospital stay, evolving from good practice advice to a standardized perioperative care program. ERAS guidelines have the aim of improving maternal and fetal outcome by increasing the safety of caesarean delivery (diminishing the rate of complications and readmission and the length of stay), enhancing recovery, improving the quality of health care, and reducing its cost.

caesarean delivery, enhanced recovery


Refacerea facilitată după operaţia cezariană este un concept nou, standardizat, care include un complex de măsuri pre-, intra- şi postoperatorii, care au ca scop reducerea morbidităţii şi grăbirea recuperării după intervenţia chirurgicală. Este o abordare nouă, multidisciplinară, a pacientului chirurgical, bazată pe dovezi medicale şi care urmăreşte optimizarea recuperării post­operatorii şi reducerea spitalizării. Conceptul este reglementat de ghiduri care urmăresc ameliorarea rezultatelor terapeutice materne şi fetale după operaţia cezariană (scăzând rata complicaţiilor, a reinternării şi a duratei spitalizării), facilitând recuperarea, îmbunătăţind calitatea îngrijirilor medicale şi reducând costurile.


Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a concept used to include all the measures taken perioperatively to reduce morbidity and facilitate early recovery. It is a paradigm shift that involves multidisciplinary approach of the surgical patient and includes a number of measures that should optimize recovery and shorten hospital stay, evolving from good clinical practice to a standardized perioperative care program. ERAS guidelines have the aim of improving maternal and fetal outcome by increasing the safety of caesarean delivery, enhancing recovery and improving health outcomes(1).

ERAS concept started in 1990’s, in Denmark, with Professor Henrik Kehlet. He was one of the pioneers of the multimodal care approach for surgical patient. He published in 1997 a comprehensive approach of the surgical patient, taking into account pathophysiological changes and evidence-based effective measures to reduce surgical stress and morbidity(2). One of the first consensus reviews was published in 2005 in a nutrition journal by Fearon et al. (ERAS Study Group) and it approached enhanced recovery after colonic surgery; a protocol was developed afterward(3). In 2010, ERAS Society was officially registered in Sweden as a nonprofit medical society.

Although spontaneous spreading of principles between related surgical departments (colorectal and gynecology) occurred, they did not have the value of a guideline. Each surgical specialty has specific items to be implemented, so proactive implementation of ERAS principles in gynecologic oncology surgery proved to be necessary to achieve optimal outcomes(4). A systematic review of literature regarding ERAS principles in gynecologic oncology surgery underlined the significant improved outcomes and patients satisfaction, reduction of costs and length of admission(5). An audit of ERAS implementation process results was published in 2018. Patients outcomes, length of hospital admission and economic impact were assessed. ERAS implementation results showed shorter hospital stay, low complications rate, and significant cost savings(6).

Antenatal and preoperative measures

The antenatal approach for ERAS concept should start between 10 and 20 weeks of gestation(1).

The patient should receive preadmission information and be managed by a multidisciplinary team. Education, counselling and management of maternal-associated morbidity should be the initial part of ERAS for future caesarean delivery patients. This is the case of the patients who already have an indication of delivery by caesarean section, but also for the complex cases where an unplanned caesarean delivery might be anticipated.

Counselling and antenatal information

Adequate and updated information regarding both possibilities, either vaginal or caesarean section delivery, should be provided to the pregnant patient and to her partner during antenatal visits. The discussion should be documented, as well as the type of recommended de­li­very, timing of delivery, details regarding the provider of information, and the acceptance and level of understanding of the patient. The patients opting for vaginal delivery should be informed also of the possibility of emergency caesarean delivery, especially because usually the time for consenting before an emergency caesarean section is seldom short. The information will be reiterated before starting the procedure, and an informed consent will be signed by the patient.

The details that should be discussed antenatally include the indication of caesarean delivery, the type of abdominal incision used, a short description of the procedure, with duration of surgery and median length of hospital stay, possible complications that could occur, postoperative risk of thromboembolism, prophylactic use of compressive stockings and prophylactic low molecular weight heparin, the plan of oral solid food and fluids intake pre- and postoperatively and the locations of mother and baby after delivery.

For emergency situations, the patient should receive essential information regarding the surgical procedure and the indication that rushed the decision from the obstetrician, as well as information regarding the type of anesthesia from on duty anesthesiologist. A discussion with the neonatologist should be useful when the indication for caesarean section is related to fetal concerns(1)

Patients requiring caesarean section delivery without medical indication, after failure of counseling them for vaginal delivery, should be informed appropriately regarding the risks such as intraoperative organ injury, bleeding, postoperative infection or thrombosis, as well as pain and delayed ambulation(7-10). Late risks for the following pregnancies, like uterine rupture or placenta accreta spectrum, should also be acknowledged(11,12).

The adjustment of clinical factors that might interfere with rapid recovery after caesarean section (CS) is also important. Frequent comorbidities, such as obesity, anemia, hypertension and diabetes mellitus, have to be taken into account(13). They require preoperative optimization for an improved surgical outcome. Maternal obesity preexisting to pregnancy increases the risks of complication during pregnancy, CS delivery and after surgery(14-16). The risks of maternal and fetal morbidity and of CS delivery are increased, as well by maternal hypertension, either chronic preexisting or pregnancy-induced forms; it should therefore be managed accordingly during pregnancy, with the aim of preventing severe hypertension and prolonging gestation to reduce fetal prematurity-associated morbidity(17). Diabetes mellitus should be treated before and during pregnancy because of associated increased risks of fetal anomalies, abortion, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia, but also preeclampsia and CS delivery(18-20). Almost 40% of pregnancies are complicated by anemia (Hb level under 11 g/dl) according to WHO data. Romania had a prevalence of about 27% in 2016(21,22). Anemia should be corrected during the antenatal period to reduce the risks of perioperative morbidity, transfusion rate and fetal adverse outcomes(23,24). Smoking cessation during pregnancy should also be strongly recommended.

Preoperative measures

The preoperative period refers usually to a series of measures concentrated between 30 and 60 minutes be­fore CS delivery procedure starts, excepting for emergency unscheduled CS, when this period is much reduced.

Anesthetic medication

Preoperative anesthetic medication has the aim of reducing aspiration pneumonitis, which occurs usually in patients requiring general anesthesia, including CS delivery patients with locoregional anesthesia who need conversion to general anesthesia. The medication which proved to be effective and safe includes antagonists of H2 histamine receptors and antacids that lower the risk of aspiration pneumonitis(25). There is no proven benefit for premedication with sedatives before CS delivery. Fetal and maternal side effects presumed to be related to the use of sedative premedication, from fetal hypotonia or floppy baby syndrome, lower Apgar score, to impaired maternal psychomotor function, were not proved in several trials(26-28). However, routine use of sedatives in the preoperative setting before CS delivery should be avoided(1).

Bowel preparation

Once routinely used before surgical procedures, especially colorectal surgery, bowel preparation, either with oral laxatives or with enema, has been proved ineffective in lowering perioperative morbidity (site infection, anastomotic leak)(29). Hence, oral or mechanical bowel preparation before caesarean section delivery should not be recommended(1).

Preoperative alimentation

Because of the presumed risks of aspiration pneumonitis with preoperative nutrition, fasting was usually advocated before any surgical procedure, starting at least 6 hours before surgery or even more. Current evidence failed to demonstrate an increased risk of aspiration or related morbidity in patients who had oral fluids, compared with traditional fasting policy (“nil by mouth from midnight”)(30). The present ERAS guidelines published in The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology advise patients to drink clear fluids up to 2 hours before surgery and have a light meal up to 6 hours before surgery, based on current existing evidence(1,31,32).

 Oral carbohydrate supplements have been evaluated for their role in improving outcomes when administered up to 2 hours before surgery. The exceptions are the patients with diabetes mellitus. Most trials did not report a clear benefit in enhanced recovery of the surgical patient, but there were no safety concerns revealed. A Cochrane review of literature from 2014 about carbohydrate supplements before planned surgery revealed only a small reduction in the length of hospital stay, with no impact on postoperative complication rates(33). The evidence for recommending oral carbohydrate fluid intake up to 2 hours before caesarean section in non-diabetic patients is therefore low(1).

Antibiotic prophylaxis

Preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis should be administered between 30 to 60 minutes before skin incision. The risk of postoperative infection is different depending on the type of surgery, emergent or elective. Elective CS delivery has a lower risk of postoperative infection morbidity because the type of wound is considered clean (class I), while emergency CS delivery is considered rather clean-contaminated (class II) or sometimes when frank intrauterine infection is proved even contaminated (class III)(34,35). Microbial profile is also different between elective surgery (skin flora) and emergency surgery in a patient in labor with ruptured membranes (skin and vaginal flora).

For elective CS delivery, the risk of infection is lower and antibiotic prophylaxis with a narrow-spectrum first generation cephalosporin (such as cefazolin) is the standard of care(36,37). Although initial protocols were limiting fetal exposure to antibiotic by administering it after cord clamping, systematic reviews revealed significantly increased efficacy when the administration was offered before skin incision. Current standard recommendation is to administer the prophylactic antibiotic 30 to 60 minutes before skin incision(38).

For emergency CS delivery (in labor with ruptured membranes), the same principles mentioned before are valid with some remarks. First, the microbial spectrum is different and includes vaginal flora apart from the skin bacteria; adding antibiotics to broaden the spectrum (azithromycin) has been shown, in several trials, to significantly reduce postoperative infection rate(39-41). Secondly, in patients in labor or with ruptured membranes, there is a clear communication of the vaginal flora with upper genital tract, and antimicrobial vaginal preparation with povidone-iodine has been proved effective in multiple studies(42).

Local antiseptic measures

As already mentioned, vaginal preparation with povidone iodine or chlorhexidine before CS delivery in labor or with ruptured membranes decreases the incidence of postoperative infectious morbidity, especially endometritis, from 8.7% to a rate of only 3.8%(42).

When evaluating the risks of surgical site infection depending on the antiseptic used for patient skin cleansing, although a Cochrane meta-analysis was inconclusive when comparing povidone iodine with chlorhexidine-alcohol, recent studies tend to favor chlorhexidine for reduced rates of surgical site infections(43-45).

Concerning the substances used for surgical hand antisepsis, a meta-analysis failed to show any significant difference between various antiseptic solutions or different alcohol rubs with different antiseptic ingredients or the role of brushes or nail picks; the evidence found was of low quality overall(46).

The administration of topical antibiotics to promote wound healing and reduce surgical site infections (SSI) seems to reduce the rate of SSI when compared to no local antibiotics strategy, with moderate quality evid­ence, but with no conclusion regarding the developing of antibiotic resistance and allergic contact dermatitis(47).

Wound dressing at the end of surgery is a generalized practice that was analyzed in a Cochrane meta-analysis regarding the impact on SSI. The evidence was of low quality, with conclusions leaving wound dressing to patient preference and to dressing costs(48).

In conclusion, regarding antibiotic and antiseptic prophylaxis, first-generation cephalosporin should be administered intravenously before skin incision within 60 minutes, with the addition of azithromycin for CS done in labor or with ruptured membranes. Povidone iodine should be recommended for vaginal antisepsis before CS delivery in patients with ruptured membranes or in labor. Chlorhexidine-alcohol provides better protection against SSI when used for abdominal skin disinfection compared to povidone iodine(35).

Peri- and intraoperative measures

Prevention of intraoperative hypothermia

Perioperative hypothermia in the setting of CS delivery under spinal anesthesia is a common event due to multiple predisposing factors involved. Spinal anesthesia impairs temperature autoregulation by altering vasomotor response and inhibiting shivering. Also, spinal anesthesia blocks the input from peripheral cold sensorial receptors, and intrathecal morphine derivatives for postoperative pain control increase the degree of hypothermia(49). Hypothermia is frequent in patients having CS delivery, some trials citing a prevalence of up to 90% of patients without any active warming protection measures(50). Perioperative hypothermia was associated with adverse outcomes in multiple trials, including increased length of hospital stay, increased blood loss and surgical site infection rates or myocardial ischemia(51,52). The neonate is also adversely affected by the hypothermia, revealed by low Apgar scores or umbilical pH(53). Adequate temperature monitoring of CS patients is difficult and unreliable using conventional strategies and often monitoring is not done at all(54,55). Modern techniques of temperature monitoring are under evaluation(56). The prevention of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia was obtained combining dif­ferent strategies like using intravenous warmed fluids, forced-air warming or increasing the operating room temperature. All the aforementioned measures were found significantly effective and are recommended to reduce perioperative hypothermia(35,57-59).

Anesthetic management

Regional anesthesia or neuraxial techniques are the preferred methods used for CS delivery when compared with general anesthesia because of the reduced rates of maternal deaths due to anesthesia and to reduced postoperative sedation(60,61). However, a systematic review failed to identify any significant differences in major adverse maternal or fetal outcomes between regional and general anesthesia, possible due to inadequate power to identify rare events like death or other severe morbidity(62). When spinal and epidural anesthesia were compared in a meta-analysis, spinal anesthesia enabled earlier start of surgery, but having more hypotensive events, without significant differences regarding failure of procedure or side-effects like headache, nausea and vomiting or other postoperative complications(63). When compared with general anesthesia, regional anesthesia is the method of choice for CS delivery.

Surgical technique aspects

Although CS is one of the most frequent surgical procedures, a consensus regarding the best technique on evidence-based data is still lacking. Different authors have multiple variations of the technique, which makes it difficult sometimes to reach valid conclusions. Nevertheless, there are multiple randomized trials and systematic reviews assessing different steps of the procedure.

Surgical skin incision, traditionally favored, is low-transverse Pfannenstiel. The recently described Joel-Cohen technique consists in transversely sharply incising the subcutaneous fat and rectus abdominis fascia only in the midline, digitally expansion of rectus fascia laterally and separation of rectus muscles in the midline by pulling. Peritoneum is entered bluntly with the fingers and expanded cranio-caudally.

The development of the bladder flap after incision of vesical-uterine peritoneal fold does not bring any advantage and should be abandoned(64,65). Sharp incision in the midline of the uterine segment until membranes are bulging should be bluntly expanded by pulling with fingers cranio-caudally. This approach is followed apparently by less blood loss and less lateral extensions in the uterine pedicles(66,67). The Joel-Cohen technique based mainly on blunt dissection is associated with less blood loss, shorter operating time and faster postoperative recovery(68-70).

Closing the hysterotomy incision can be accomplished in several ways. A Cochrane meta-analysis failed to identify any significant difference between single versus double layer closure, when febrile morbidity and the risk of blood transfusion were analyzed(71). However, a higher risk of uterine rupture for single layer closure patients in a subsequent pregnancy was revealed in several trials(72,73). Locked single layer closure of uterine hysterotomy incision rather than unlocked was associated with a higher risk of rupture during trial of labor in patients with CS scar(74). There were no significant differences identified when absorbable or delayed absorbable suture were used for uterine closure.

Visceral or parietal peritoneum closure did not add any benefit for the patient and its omission shortened the operative time(75-77). The re-approximation of rectus muscles should be discouraged because it does not bring any advantage for the patient(78). Rectus fascia should be closed using running absorbable suture(79). The subcutaneous fat tissue should be closed with absorbable stitches, interrupted or continuously, in patients with more than 2 cm layer thickness to reduce delayed healing and wound infection rate(79-82). Subcutaneous drain placement does not bring any proven benefit for wound healing process.

Skin closure can be done with subcuticular absorbable stitches or using staples. A Cochrane meta-analysis from 2012 did not show any difference between subcuticular suture and non-absorbable staples regarding wound infection rate or other wound complications, pain or cosmesis. Skin separation rate was slightly higher in staple closure population, especially when staples were removed before four days postpartum(83-85). A randomized trial from 2014 comparing outcomes of subcuticular suture closure and staple closure revealed a significantly higher skin separation rate with staples, while suture closure decreased complications with over 50%(86). Other randomized trials failed to prove any significant difference regarding healing outcome between the two methods of skin closure, even in obese patients(87,88). Overall, subcuticular skin suturing should be preferred over closing with staples(35).

Perioperative fluid balance

Fluid management is important to prevent depletion as well as overloading to achieve optimal recovery. Main­taining optimal tissue perfusion by an adequate intravascular blood volume improves fetal oxygenation and outcomes, as well as maternal postoperative recovery. Fluid overload should be avoided as well, because of the risks of maternal pulmonary edema. The prevention of spinal anesthesia induced hypotension is achieved with a loading regimen based on a crystalloid solution preload and phenylephrine infusion, that proved to be beneficial for mother and fetus(89-91). Perioperative fluid balance to avoid overloading should be judiciously analyzed, especially in hypertensive pregnant patients, but also in normotensive parturients; acute pulmonary edema leads to significant morbidity and mortality in pregnancy(92). In conclusion, the maintenance of euvolemia with cristaloids and vasopressors is important for improving fetal and maternal outcome at caesarean delivery.

Enhanced recovery after surgery is a concept that gained popularity because of the need to standardize surgical practice that was often much more heterogenous at the individual level and lacking evidence-based stepwise approach of the perioperative medical care and intraoperative technique. Caesarean delivery is the most common surgery in many developed countries in the world, with a steady rise from 4.5% in 1970 to 32% in 2015 in the US, while in Eastern Europe in 2015 the rates cited were around 27%, with highest rates in Latin America and Caribbean, of around 44%(93). Even higher rates of caesarean section can be found in several urban areas in Romania, so a standardized pathway for CS delivery is an important step in reducing associated morbidity and costs. Therefore, implementing evidence-based measures in caesarean section delivery to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes and increase efficacy and effectiveness of the medical process is an important step in optimizing the healthcare activity. 

Conflict of interests: The authors declare no conflict of interests.


1. Wilson RD, Caughey AB, Wood SL, Macones GA, Wrench IJ, Huang J, Norman M, Pettersson K, Fawcett WJ, Shalabi MM, Metcalfe A, Gramlich L, Nelson G. Guidelines for Antenatal and Preoperative care in Cesarean Delivery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Society Recommendations (Part 1). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Dec; 219(6): 523.e1-523.e15.
2. Kehlet H. Multimodal approach to control postoperative pathophysiology and rehabilitation. Br J Anaesth. 1997; 78(05):606–617. 
3. Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M, Revhaug A, Dejong CH, Lassen K, Nygren J, Hausel J, Soop M, Andersen J, Kehlet H. Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clin Nutr. 2005 Jun; 24(3):466-77. 
4. de Groot JJ, van Es LE, Maessen JM, Dejong CH, Kruitwagen RF, Slangen BF. Diffusion of Enhanced Recovery principles in gynecologic oncology surgery: is active implementation still necessary? Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Sep; 134(3):570-5. 
5. Nelson G, Kalogera E, Dowdy SC. Enhanced recovery pathways in gynecologic oncology. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Dec; 135(3):586-94. 
6. Bisch SP, Wells T, Gramlich L, Faris P, Wang X, Tran DT, Thanh NX, Glaze S, Chu P, Ghatage P, Nation J, Capstick V, Steed H, Sabourin J, Nelson G. Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) in gynecologic oncology: System-wide implementation and audit leads to improved value and patient outcomes. Gynecol Oncol. 2018 Oct; 151(1):117-123. 
7. Korb D, Goffinet F, Seco A, Chevret S, Deneux-Tharaux C. Risk of severe maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery and the role of maternal age: a population-based propensity score analysis. CMAJ. 2019 Apr 1; 191(13):E352-60.
8. Declercq E, Barger M, Cabral HJ, et al. Maternal outcomes associated with planned primary caesarean births compared with planned vaginal births. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109:669.
9. Oliphant SS, Bochenska K, Tolge ME, et al. Maternal lower urinary tract injury at the time of Caesarean delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2014; 25:1709.
10. Kallianidis AF, Schutte JM, van Roosmalen J, et al. Maternal mortality after caesarean section in the Netherlands. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018; 229:148.
11. Jackson S, Fleege L, Fridman M, et al. Morbidity following primary caesarean delivery in the Danish National Birth Cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 206:139.e1.
12. Creanga AA, Bateman BT, Butwick AJ, et al. Morbidity associated with cesarean delivery in the United States: Is placenta accreta an increasingly important contributor? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 213:384.e1.
13. Salahuddin M, Mandell DJ, Lakey DL, Eppes CS, Patel DA. Maternal risk factor index and cesarean delivery among women with nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex deliveries, Texas, 2015. Birth. 2019 Mar; 46(1):182-92.
14. Al-Kubaisy W, Al-Rubaey M, Al-Naggar RA, Karim B, Noor NA. Maternal obesity and its relation with the cesarean section: A hospital based cross sectional study in Iraq. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2014 Dec; 14(1):235.
15. Getahun D, Kaminsky LM, Elsasser DA, Kirby RS, Ananth CV, Vintzileos AM. Changes in prepregnancy body mass index between pregnancies and risk of primary cesarean delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007 Oct 1;197(4):376-e1.
16. Marchi J, Berg M, Dencker A, Olander EK, Begley C. Risks associated with obesity in pregnancy, for the mother and baby: a systematic review of reviews. Obes Rev. 2015; 16: 621–38. 
17. Penfield CA, Nageotte MP, Wing DA. Disparate Rates of Caesarean Delivery in Term Nulliparous Women with Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy. American Journal of Perinatology. 2019 Mar 1.
18. Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of treatment for mild gestational diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2009; 361:1339–48. 
19. Balsells M, Garcia-Patterson A, Gich I, Corcoy R. Maternal and fetal outcome in women with type 2 versus type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009; 94:4284–91. 
20. Alexopoulos AS, Blair R, Peters AL. Management of Preexisting Diabetes in Pregnancy: A Review. JAMA. 2019 May 14; 321(18):1811-9.
21. World Health Organization. Hemoglobin concentrations for the diagnosis of anaemia and assessment of severity. Vitamin and mineral nutrition information system. World Health Organization. United Nations; 2011; WHO/ NMH/NHD/MNM/11.1; Available at:, accessed August 04, 2019.
22., accessed August 04, 2019. 
23. Akinlusi FM, Rabiu KA, Durojaiye IA, Adewunmi AA, Ottun TA, Oshodi YA. Caesarean delivery-related blood transfusion: correlates in a tertiary hospital in Southwest Nigeria. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2018 Dec; 18(1):24.
24. Butwick AJ, Walsh EM, Kuzniewicz M, Li SX, Escobar GJ. Patterns and predictors of severe postpartum anemia after Caesarean section. Transfusion. 2017 Jan; 57(1):36-44.
25. Paranjothy S, Griffiths JD, Broughton HK, Gyte GML, Brown HC, Thomas J. Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004943.
26. Mokhtar AM, Elsakka AI, Ali HM. Premedication with midazolam prior to cesarean delivery in preeclamptic parturients: A randomized controlled trial. Anesthesia, essays and researches. 2016 Sep; 10(3):631.
27. Senel AC, Mergan F. Premedication with midazolam prior to caesarean section has no neonatal adverse effects. Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia. 2014 Feb; 64(1):16-21.
28. Frölich MA, Burchfield DJ, Euliano T, Caton D. A single dose of fentanyl and midazolam prior to Cesarean section have no adverse neontal effects. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia. 2006 Jan 1; 53(1):79-85.
29. Lurie S, Baider C, Glickman H, Golan A, Sadan O. Are enemas given before cesarean section useful? A prospective randomized controlled study. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2012 Jul 1; 163(1):27-9.
30. Brady MC, Kinn S, Stuart P, Ness V. Preoperative fasting for adults to prevent perioperative complications. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2003; 4.
31. Søreide E, Eriksson LI, Hirlekar G, Eriksson H, Henneberg SW, Sandin R, Raeder J (Task Force on Scandinavian Preoperative Fasting Guidelines, Clinical Practice Committee Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine). Preoperative fasting guidelines: an update. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2005 Sep; 49(8):1041-7.
32. Smith I, Kranke P, Murat I, Smith A, O'Sullivan G, Søreide E, Spies C. Perioperative fasting in adults and children: guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology. European Journal of Anaesthesiology. 2011 Aug 1; 28(8):556-69.
33. Smith MD, McCall J, Plank L, Herbison GP, Soop M, Nygren J. Preoperative carbohydrate treatment for enhancing recovery after elective surgery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 8.
34. CDC/NHSN surveillance definitions for specific types of infections. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2017 ( cnosinfdef_current.pdf, accessed 22 February 2018). 
35. Caughey AB, Wood SL, Macones GA, Wrench IJ, Huang J, Norman M, Pettersson K, Fawcett WJ, Shalabi MM, Metcalfe A, Gramlich L. Guidelines for intraoperative care in cesarean delivery: enhanced recovery after surgery society recommendations (part 2). American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018 Dec 1; 219(6):533-44. 
36. Smaill FM, Grivell RM. Antibiotic prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis for preventing infection after cesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 10.
37. Gyte GM, Dou L, Vazquez JC. Different classes of antibiotics given to women routinely for preventing infection at caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 11.
38. Mackeen AD, Packard RE, Ota E, Berghella V, Baxter JK. Timing of intravenous prophylactic antibiotics for preventing postpartum infectious morbidity in women undergoing cesarean delivery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 12.
39. Tita AT, Rouse DJ, Blackwell S, Saade GR, Spong CY, Andrews WW. Evolving concepts in antibiotic prophylaxis for cesarean delivery: A systematic review. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009 Mar; 113(3):675.
40. Ward E, Duff P. A comparison of 3 antibiotic regimens for prevention of postcesarean endometritis: an historical cohort study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2016 Jun 1; 214(6):751-e1.
41. Tita AT, Szychowski JM, Boggess K, Saade G, Longo S, Clark E, Esplin S, Cleary K, Wapner R, Letson K, Owens M. Adjunctive azithromycin prophylaxis for cesarean delivery. New England Journal of Medicine. 2016 Sep 29; 375(13):1231-41.
42. Haas DM, Morgan S, Contreras K, Enders S. Vaginal preparation with antiseptic solution before cesarean section for preventing postoperative infections. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2018; 7.
43. Hadiati DR, Hakimi M, Nurdiati DS, Ota E. Skin preparation for preventing infection following caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 9.
44. Tolcher MC, Whitham MD, El-Nashar SA, Clark SL. Chlorhexidine-Alcohol Compared with Povidone-Iodine Preoperative Skin Antisepsis for Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. American Journal of Perinatology. 2019 Jan; 36(02):118-23.
45. Tuuli MG, Liu J, Stout MJ, Martin S, Cahill AG, Odibo AO, Colditz GA, Macones GA. A randomized trial comparing skin antiseptic agents at caesarean delivery. New England Journal of Medicine. 2016 Feb 18; 374(7):647-55.
46. Tanner J, Dumville JC, Norman G, Fortnam M. Surgical hand antisepsis to reduce surgical site infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; 1.
47. Heal CF, Banks JL, Lepper PD, Kontopantelis E, van Driel ML. Topical antibiotics for preventing surgical site infection in wounds healing by primary intention. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; 11.
48. Dumville JC, Gray TA, Walter CJ, Sharp CA, Page T, Macefield R, Blencowe N, Milne TK, Reeves BC, Blazeby J. Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; 12.
49. Allen TK, Habib AS. Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia induced by spinal anesthesia for caesarean delivery might be more significant than we think: are we doing enough to warm our parturients? Anesthesia and Analgesia. 2018 Jan; 126(1):7.
50. Cobb B, Cho Y, Hilton G, Ting V, Carvalho B. Active warming utilizing combined IV fluid and forced-air warming decreases hypothermia and improves maternal comfort during cesarean delivery: a randomized control trial. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2016 May 1; 122(5):1490-7.
51. Rajagopalan S, Mascha E, Na J, Sessler DI. The effects of mild perioperative hypothermia on blood loss and transfusion requirement. Anesthesiology. 2008; 108:71–7.
52. Kurz A, Sessler DI, Lenhardt R. Perioperative normothermia to reduce the incidence of surgical-wound infection and shorten hospitalization. N Eng J Med. 1996; 334:1209–16. 
53. Perlman J, Kjaer K. Neonatal and maternal temperature regulation during and after delivery. Anesth Analg. 2016; 123:168–72. 
54. Frank SM, Nguyen JM, Garcia CM, Barnes RA. Temperature monitoring practices during regional anesthesia. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 1999 Feb 1; 88(2):373-7.
55. Sessler DI. Perioperative thermoregulation and heat balance. The Lancet. 2016 Jun 25; 387(10038):2655-64.
56. du Toit L, van Dyk D, Hofmeyr R, Lombard CJ, Dyer RA. Core temperature monitoring in obstetric spinal anesthesia using an ingestible telemetric sensor. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 2018 Jan 1; 126(1):190-5.
57. Campbell G, Alderson P, Smith AF, Warttig S. Warming of intravenous and irrigation fluids for preventing inadvertent perioperative hypothermia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015; 4.
58. Madrid E, Urrútia G, i Figuls MR, Pardo-Hernandez H, Campos JM, Paniagua P, Maestre L, Alonso-Coello P. Active body surface warming systems for preventing complications caused by inadvertent perioperative hypothermia in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2016; 4.
59. Sultan P, Habib AS, Cho Y, Carvalho B. The Effect of patient warming during Caesarean delivery on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a meta-analysis. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2015 Sep 14; 115(4):500-10.
60. Chestnut, DH. Anesthesia and maternal mortality. Anesthesiology: The Journal of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. 1997; 86.2: 273-276.
61. Apfelbaum JL, Hawkins JL, Agarkar M, Bucklin BA, Connis RT, Gambling DR, Mhyre J, Nickinovich DG, Sherman H, Tsen LC, Yaghmour ET. Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia: An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia and the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology. Anesthesiology. 2016; 124(2), pp. 270-300.
62. Afolabi BB, Lesi FE. Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 10:CD004350. 
63. Ng KW, Parsons J, Cyna AM, Middleton P. Spinal versus epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2004; 2.
64. Tuuli MG, Odibo AO, Fogertey P, Roehl K, Stamilio D, Macones GA. Utility of the bladder flap at cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2012 Apr 1; 119(4):815-21.
65. Cetin BA, Mathyk BA, Barut S, Zindar Y, Seckin KD, Kadirogullari P. Omission of a Bladder Flap during Cesarean Birth in Primiparous Women. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation. 2018; 83(6):564-8.
66. Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Di Naro E, Siesto G, Loverro G, Bolis P. Blunt expansion of the low transverse uterine incision at cesarean delivery: a randomized comparison of 2 techniques. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008 Sep 1; 199(3):292-e1.
67. Dikmen S, Kedikbasi A, Aslan Cetin BA, Kiyak H. The outcomes of extending uterine incision transversely or cephalocaudally in patients with previous cesarean section: a prospective randomized controlled study. Perinatal Journal. 2017; 25(1):1–5.
68. Hofmeyr GJ, Mathai M, Shah AN, Novikova N. Techniques for caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2008; 1.
69. Mathai M, Hofmeyr GJ, Mathai NE. Abdominal surgical incisions for caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2013; 5.
70. Saad AF, Rahman M, Costantine MM, Saade GR. Blunt versus sharp uterine incision expansion during low transverse cesarean delivery: a metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 211:684.e1–11. 
71. Dodd JM, Anderson ER, Gates S, Grivell RM. Surgical techniques for uterine incision and uterine closure at the time of caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 7.
72. Vachon-Marceau C, Demers S, Bujold E, Roberge S, Gauthier RJ, Pasquier JC, Girard M, Chaillet N, Boulvain M, Jastrow N. Single versus double-layer uterine closure at cesarean: impact on lower uterine segment thickness at next pregnancy. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2017 Jul 1; 217(1):65-e1.
73. Gyamfi C, Juhasz G, Gyamfi P, Blumenfeld Y, Stone JL. Single-versus double-layer uterine incision closure and uterine rupture. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2006 Jan 1; 19(10):639-43.
74. Roberge S, Chaillet N, Boutin A, Moore L, Jastrow N, Brassard N, Gauthier RJ, Hudic I, Shipp TD, Weimar CH, Fatusic Z. Single versus double layer closure of the hysterotomy incision during cesarean delivery and risk of uterine rupture. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 2011 Oct; 115(1):5-10.
75. Bamigboye AA, Hofmeyr GJ. Closure versus non-closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section: short- and long-term outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2014; 8.
76. Kapustian V, Anteby EY, Gdalevich M, Shenhav S, Lavie O, Gemer O. Effect of closure versus nonclosure of peritoneum at cesarean section on adhesions: a prospective randomized study. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2012 Jan 1; 206(1):56-e1.
77. Grundsell HS, Rizk DE, Kumar RM. Randomized study of non-closure of peritoneum in lower segment cesarean section. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 1998 Jan 1; 77(1):110-5.
78. Lyell DJ, Naqvi M, Wong A, Urban R, Carvalho B. Rectus muscle reapproximation at cesarean delivery and postoperative pain: a randomized controlled trial. The Surgery Journal. 2017 Jul; 3(03):e128-33.
79. Anderson ER, Gates S. Techniques and materials for closure of the abdominal wall in caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2004; 4.
80. Chelmow D, Rodriguez EJ, Sabatini MM. Suture closure of subcutaneous fat and wound disruption after cesarean delivery: a meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2004 May 1; 103(5):974-80.
81. Kawakita T, Iqbal SN, Landy HJ, Huang JC, Fries M. Reducing cesarean delivery surgical site infections: a resident-driven quality initiative. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2019 Feb 1; 133(2):282-8.
82. Pergialiotis V, Prodromidou A, Perrea DN, Doumouchtsis SK. The impact of subcutaneous tissue suturing at caesarean section on wound complications: a meta-analysis. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2017 Jun; 124(7):1018-25.
83. Mackeen AD, Berghella V, Larsen ML. Techniques and materials for skin closure in caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012; 11.
84. Tuuli MG, Rampersad RM, Carbone JF, Stamilio D, Macones GA, Odibo AO. Staples compared with subcuticular suture for skin closure after cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2011 Mar 1; 117(3):682-90.
85. Gaertner I, Burkhardt T, Beinder E. Scar appearance of different skin and subcutaneous tissue closure techniques in caesarean section: a randomized study. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2008 May 1; 138(1):29-33.
86. Mackeen AD, Khalifeh A, Fleisher J, Vogell A, Han C, Sendecki J, Pettker C, Leiby BE, Baxter JK, Sfakianaki A, Berghella V. Suture compared with staple skin closure after cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2014 Jun 1; 123(6):1169-75.
87. Madsen AM, Dow ML, Lohse CM, Tessmer-Tuck JA. Absorbable subcuticular staples versus suture for caesarean section closure: a randomised clinical trial. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. 2019 Mar; 126(4):502-10.
88. Zaki MN, Wing DA, McNulty JA. Comparison of staples vs subcuticular suture in class III obese women undergoing cesarean: a randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018 Apr 1; 218(4):451-e1.
89. Loubert C. Fluid and vasopressor management for caesarean delivery under spinal anesthesia: continuing professional development. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie. 2012 Jun 1; 59(6):604-19.
90. Cooper DW. Caesarean delivery vasopressor management. Current Opinion in Anesthesiology. 2012 Jun 1; 25(3):300-8.
91. Veeser M, Hofmann T, Roth R, Klöhr S, Rossaint R, Heesen M. Vasopressors for the management of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for elective caesarean section. Systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. 2012 Aug; 56(7):810-6.
92. Dennis AT, Solnordal CB. Acute pulmonary oedema in pregnant women. Anaesthesia. 2012 Jun; 67(6):646-59.
93. Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, Barros AJ, Barros FC, Juan L, Moller AB, Say L, Hosseinpoor AR, Yi M, Neto DD. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. The Lancet. 2018 Oct 13; 392(10155):1341-8.

Articole din ediţiile anterioare

REVIEW ARTICLES | Ediţia 4 70 / 2022

Actualizări privind spectrul de placentă accreta – de la diagnostic la tratament

Mihaela Boț, Ruxandra Ivan, Prof. Dr. Radu Vlădăreanu

Spectrul de placentă accreta (PAS), cunoscut şi sub numele de „placenta cu aderenţă morbidă”, reprezintă o entitate patologică ce cuprinde diferit...

30 decembrie 2023
ORIGINAL ARTICLES | Ediţia 3 70 / 2022

Tipuri actuale de naştere şi impactul lor asupra mamei şi fătului

Adriana Tecuci, Simona Vlădăreanu, Nicoleta Andreea Luca, Silvia Adela Constantinescu, Dr. Dragoş Tudorache, Prof. Dr. Radu Vlădăreanu

În urma evoluţiei modalităţii de naştere, am constatat, potrivit unui studiu observaţional efectuat în clinica noastră în perioada 2017-2021, o ten...

31 octombrie 2022
REVIEW ARTICLES | Ediţia 1 68 / 2020

Sarcina implantată pe cicatricea operaţiei cezariene – management

George Iancu, Radu Botezatu, Nicolae Gică, L. Mustaţă, Corina Gică, Anca Marina Ciobanu, Gheorghe Peltecu, Anca Maria Panaitescu

Sarcina implantată pe cicatricea operaţiei cezariene este o complicaţie potenţială a sarcinii survenite la o femeie cu mai multe naşteri prin opera...

16 martie 2020
ORIGINAL ARTICLES | Ediţia 1 70 / 2022

Placenta accreta – o preocupare tot mai mare în epidemia de operaţii cezariene

Cezara Diana Mugescu, Nicolae Gică, Radu Botezatu, Gheorghe Peltecu, Anca Maria Panaitescu

În ultimii ani, este de remarcat creşterea îngrijorătoare a numărului de operaţii cezariene efectuate la nivel global. Această intervenţie urmează ...

24 mai 2022