AzTrials
AzTrials

Cesarean Scar Defect (Isthmococele)NCT07611331

Single-Layer Versus Double-Layer Uterine Closure After Primary Cesarean Section

A study testing Double-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section and Single-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section in people with Cesarean Scar Defect (Isthmococele) and Pelvic Pain, run by Hédi Chaker Hospital at 1 site in Tunisia.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

This study compares two surgical techniques for closing the uterus after cesarean section: single-layer versus double-layer closure. The primary objective is to determine which technique results in better uterine scar healing, measured by residual myometrial thickness (RMT) and cesarean scar defect (niche) prevalence… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 to 45 years, women only
What is being tested?
Double-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section and Single-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
384 participants
Where
1 siteTunisia
Study dates
1 Jan 2025to 30 Apr 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 to 45 years
  • Women only
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult

Who may be able to join

  • Women aged 18 years or older
  • Singleton pregnancy
  • Gestational age ≥ 37 weeks (term pregnancy)
  • Scheduled or emergency primary cesarean section (first cesarean delivery, no previous uterine scar)
  • Low transverse uterine incision (Pfannenstiel or Joel-Cohen approach)
  • Ability to provide written informed consent
  • Willingness to attend follow-up visits at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively
  • Patient affiliated to a social security system or equivalent healthcare coverage

Who cannot join

  • Previous uterine surgery (prior cesarean section, myomectomy, uterine perforation, or any procedure leaving a uterine scar)
  • Multiple pregnancy (twins or higher-order multiples)
  • Preterm delivery (gestational age < 37 weeks)
  • Classical (vertical) or inverted T uterine incision
  • Placenta previa or placenta accreta spectrum disorder
  • Active uterine infection or chorioamnionitis at time of surgery
Show all 13Show fewer
  • Coagulation disorders or anticoagulant therapy
  • Immunosuppressive therapy or conditions affecting wound healing (systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressants)
  • Severe maternal comorbidities (uncontrolled diabetes, connective tissue disorders, chronic renal failure)
  • Participation in another interventional clinical trial
  • Patient unable to attend scheduled follow-up visits
  • Patient unable to understand or sign informed consent
  • Fetal demise or major fetal malformation

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Tunisia1 site
  • Hedi Chaker university hospital

    Sfax, Sfax Governorate, 3000

Other trials in Tunisia

About this study

Official title: Single-Layer Versus Double-Layer Uterine Closure After Primary Cesarean Section: Impact on Residual Myometrial Thickness and Cesarean Scar Defect Formation - A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

This study compares two surgical techniques for closing the uterus after cesarean section: single-layer versus double-layer closure. The primary objective is to determine which technique results in better uterine scar healing, measured by residual myometrial thickness (RMT) and cesarean scar defect (niche) prevalence at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively.

BACKGROUND:

Read more

Cesarean section is one of the most common surgeries worldwide. After fetal delivery, the uterine incision must be closed by suture. Poor scar healing can lead to niche formation, abnormal bleeding, pelvic pain, dyspareunia, and complications in future pregnancies including uterine rupture and placenta accreta.

INTERVENTION:

Participants are randomized 1:1 to receive either:

  • Single-layer closure: one continuous non-locking suture through full myometrial thickness
  • Double-layer closure: two successive extra-mucosal non-locking sutures excluding the decidua

ASSESSMENTS:

Transvaginal ultrasound at 6 weeks and 6 months measures RMT and niche presence. Standardized symptom questionnaires assess pelvic pain, spotting, dysmenorrhea, and dyspareunia.

ELIGIBILITY:

Women aged 18-45 years undergoing primary cesarean section with singleton pregnancy at term (gestational age ≥ 37 weeks).

ENROLLMENT: 384 participants (192 per group)

SETTING: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hedi Chaker University Hospital, Sfax, Tunisia

FOLLOW-UP: 6 months per participant in which the patients attend 2 follow-up visits:

First visit 6 weeks after surgery. Second visit at 6 months after surgery

.And have a pelvic ultrasound at each visit

Read the detailed description

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE

Cesarean section is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide. After fetal delivery, the uterine incision must be closed by suture using one of two accepted techniques: single-layer or double-layer closure. Despite widespread use of both methods : no consensus exists regarding which technique produces superior long-term uterine scar healing.

Poor scar healing can result in a niche. formation (isthmocele), defined as a triangular anechoic indentation of the anterior uterine wall at the scar site with depth greater than or equal to 2 mm (Jordan et al., 2019). Niches occur in 25-70% of women after cesarean section and are associated with postmenstrual spotting, chronic pelvic pain, dyspareunia, fertility impairment, and serious obstetric complications in future pregnancies, including placenta accreta spectrum and uterine rupture.

The residual myometrial thickness (RMT) is the primary ultrasound marker of scar healing quality, defined as the minimum myometrial thickness at the scar site. An RMT below 2.5 mm is associated with a substantially increased risk of uterine rupture in subsequent pregnancies.

Previous studies comparing single-layer and double-layer closure have been limited by heterogeneous populations including scarred uteri, non-standardized surgical techniques, inconsistent ultrasound protocols, and insufficient sample sizes. No study has focused exclusively on primary cesarean sections with a fully standardized operative protocol.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUES

Single-Layer Closure (Group A): The uterine incision is closed with one continuous non-locking suture incorporating the full thickness of the myometrium in one pass, including the decidua.

Double-Layer Closure (Group B): The uterine incision is closed with two successive non-locking extra-mucosal sutures, excluding the decidua. Layer 1 approximates the inner half of the myometrium. Layer 2 buries the first layer, incorporating the outer half of the myometrium and uterine serosa.

All other operative steps are strictly standardized across both groups.

ULTRASOUND ASSESSMENT PROTOCOL

Transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) is performed by blinded trained sonographers using Samsung HS40 with EVN4-9 probe (4-9 MHz), with empty bladder, preferably in the follicular phase (Day 7-14 of the menstrual cycle), in the mid-sagittal plane.

RMT is measured perpendicular to the serosa at the thinnest scar point. Adjacent myometrial thickness (AMT) is measured 5-10 mm from the scar on both sides. The myometrial ratio is calculated as RM (%) = RMT/AMT x 100.

Niche dimensions (depth, length, width) and volume (ellipsoid formula) are recorded when present.

RANDOMIZATION

Participants are randomized 1:1 using the Clinical Trial Randomization Tool with permuted blocks of variable sizes (4, 6, and 8). Allocation is revealed to the operating surgeon immediately before hysterorrhaphy, after fetal and placentaldelivery. Participants and ultrasound assessors are blinded to group allocation.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Primary analysis uses multiple linear regression for RMT and binary logistic regression for niche prevalence, adjusted for age, BMI, gestational age, uterine exteriorization, surgeon category, and cesarean indication.

Advanced analyses include linear mixed-effects models for repeated measures, Firth penalized logistic regression for predictive modeling, counterfactual mediation analysis (Imai et al.) with bootstrap validation (10,000 replications), inverse probability weighting for loss to follow-up, and five-scenario multiple imputation (MICE).

Software: SPSS v26.0 and R v4.3. Reporting: CONSORT 2010 guidelines.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

This trial is conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (2013), ICH-GCP E6(R2), and Tunisian national regulations. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Medicine of Sfax (Approval No. 31/26). All participants provide written informed consent. Participation is voluntary and withdrawal is permitted at any time without consequence to medical care.

Being tested
Double-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section, Single-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section
Keywords
single layer, double layer, Residual Myometrial Thickness (RMT), Ultrasound, Isthmocele-niche, Cesarean, Scar healing
Medical subject headings
Pelvic Pain, Metrorrhagia

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Double-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean sectionProcedure or surgery

    Also called Two-layer uterine closure, Double-layer uterine closure, HDP technique

    After fetal and placental delivery, the uterine incision is closed in two layers using continuous absorbable suture (polyglactin 910). Layer 1: running suture approximating the full myometrial thickness. Layer 2: continuous imbricating suture reinforcing the first layer and improving hemostasis. Additional reinforcement sutures placed if needed. Aims to optimize uterine scar healing and reduce cesarean scar defect (niche) formation.

  • Single-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean sectionProcedure or surgery

    Also called One-layer uterine closure, Single-layer uterine closure, HPU technique

    After fetal and placental delivery, the uterine incision is closed in one single layer using a continuous absorbable suture (polyglactin 910) approximating the full myometrial thickness in a running pattern. No second reinforcement layer is performed. Additional reinforcement sutures are placed if needed. This represents the conventional standard technique for uterine closure at cesarean section.

Study groups in NCT07611331
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Single-layer Uterine Closure (HPU)Active comparatorParticipants allocated to this arm undergo primary cesarean section with single-layer uterine closure (hysterorrhaphy). After fetal and placental extraction, the uterine incision is closed in one single layer using a continuous absorbable suture (polyglactin 910 or equivalent), which approximates the myometrium in a running unlocked pattern. No second imbricating layer is performed. Additional interrupted sutures (reinforcement stitches) may be placed if necessary for bleeding control. All participants are followed postoperatively with standardized transvaginal ultrasound assessments at 6 weeks and 6 months to evaluate residual myometrial thickness (RMT) and cesarean scar defect (niche) development, as well as clinical symptom monitoring.
Receives: Procedure: Single-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section
Double-layer Uterine Closure (HDP)Experimentalarticipants allocated to this arm undergo primary cesarean section with double-layer uterine closure (hysterorrhaphy). After fetal and placental extraction, the uterine incision is closed in two distinct layers using a continuous absorbable suture (polyglactin 910 or equivalent). The first layer approximates the myometrium with a running unlocked suture. The second layer invaginates the first using a continuous suture to reinforce the closure and improve hemostasis. Additional interrupted sutures (reinforcement stitches) may be placed if necessary for bleeding control. All participants are followed postoperatively with standardized transvaginal ultrasound assessments at 6 weeks and 6 months to evaluate residual myometrial thickness (RMT) and cesarean scar defect (niche) development, as well as clinical symptom monitoring.
Receives: Procedure: Double-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Residual Myometrial Thickness (RMT) at the Cesarean Scar at 6 Weeks and 6 Months

    Residual myometrial thickness (RMT) measured in millimeters at the thinnest point of the uterine scar using standardized transvaginal two-dimensional ultrasound, performed by blinded sonographers according to the protocol of Naji et al. (2012). RMT compared between single-layer (HPU) and double-layer (HDP) closure groups at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively.

    Measured: 6 weeks and 6 months after cesarean section

  2. Prevalence of Cesarean Scar Defect (Niche) at 6 Weeks and 6 Months Postoperatively

    Cesarean scar defect (niche) defined as a hypoechoic triangular indentation at the site of the uterine incision with depth ≥ 2mm or residual myometrial thickness (RMT)/adjacent myometrial thickness (AMT) ratio < 50%, detected by standardized transvaginal two-dimensional ultrasound. Prevalence compared between single-layer (HPU) and double-layer (HDP) closure groups at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively.

    Measured: 6 weeks and 6 months after cesarean section

Secondary outcomes (9)
  1. Prevalence of Gynecological Symptoms Related to Cesarean Scar Defect

    Assessment of symptoms potentially related to uterine scar defect including: postmenstrual spotting, menometrorrhagia, dysmenorrhea, chronic pelvic pain, dyspareunia, urinary symptoms, and abnormal uterine bleeding at day 10 postoperatively. Symptoms assessed by standardized clinical questionnaire at 6 weeks and 6 months. Compared between HPU and HDP groups.

    Measured: Day 10, 6 weeks, and 6 months after cesarean section

  2. Identification of Independent Risk Factors for Cesarean Scar Defect Formation

    Identification of independent risk factors for cesarean scar defect (niche) at 6 weeks and 6 months using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Variables assessed include: closure technique, operative duration, use of reinforcement sutures, uterine position, BMI, parity, type of cesarean section (elective vs emergency), and cervical dilation at time of surgery.

    Measured: 6 weeks and 6 months after cesarean section

  3. Cesarean Scar Defect Linear Dimensions

    Length, width, and depth of detected cesarean scar defect measured in millimeters by transvaginal ultrasound at 6 weeks and 6 months. Unit of Measure: Millimeters (mm)

    Measured: 6 weeks and 6 months after cesarean section

  4. Cesarean Scar Defect Volume

    Estimated volume of cesarean scar defect calculated using ellipsoid formula: V(mm³) = (π/6) × Length × Width × Depth Unit of Measure: Cubic millimeters (mm³)

    Measured: 6 weeks and 6 months post-cesarean

  5. Operative Duration of Hysterorrhaphy and Total Cesarean Section

    Measurement of time (minutes and seconds) required for uterine closure (hysterorrhaphy duration) and total operative time from skin incision to skin closure. Number of suture materials used and frequency of additional reinforcement sutures also recorded. Compared between HPU and HDP groups.

    Measured: preoperative (during cesarean section procedure)

  6. Intraoperative Complications Rate

    Rate of intraoperative complications including hemorrhage requiring transfusion, bladder injury, ureteral injury, and unintended uterine incision extension. Unit of Measure: Number of events (n) and percentage (%)

    Measured: Perioperative : During cesarean section procedure

  7. Postoperative Infectious Complications Rate

    Rate of postoperative infectious complications including endometritis, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection, assessed during hospitalization and at 6-week visit. Unit of Measure: Number of events (n) and percentage (%)

    Measured: Up to 6 weeks after cesarean section

  8. Hospital Length of Stay

    Number of days from cesarean section to hospital discharge. Unit of Measure: Days

    Measured: Up to 5 days after cesarean section

  9. Blood Transfusion Requirement

    Number of packed red blood cell units transfused during hospitalization. Unit of Measure: Number of units

    Measured: Up to 5 days after cesarean section

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted28 May 2026
  2. Study start1 Jan 2025
  3. Primary completion1 Jan 2026
  4. Study completion30 Apr 2026

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
A prospective, randomized, parallel-group trial comparing two uterine closure techniques during primary cesarean section. Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either single-layer hysterorrhaphy (HPU) or double-layer hysterorrhaphy (HDP). Blinding was maintained for the ultrasound evaluators. Uterine scar quality (RMT and niche prevalence) and clinical symptoms are assessed at 6 weeks and 6 months post-surgery.
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Participant, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
384 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07611331
Sponsor's protocol ID
31/26
Status last verified
May 2026
First submitted
9 May 2026
Last updated
28 May 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: Individual participant data will not be shared publicly due to patient confidentiality requirements and institutional regulations. Aggregate results will be published in peer-reviewed journals.

Publications

  • Bij de Vaate AJ, van der Voet LF, Naji O, Witmer M, Veersema S, Brolmann HA, Bourne T, Huirne JA. Prevalence, potential risk factors for development and symptoms related to the presence of uterine niches following Cesarean section: systematic review. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Apr;43(4):372-82. doi: 10.1002/uog.13199.

    PubMed 23996650
  • Di Spiezio Sardo A, Saccone G, McCurdy R, Bujold E, Bifulco G, Berghella V. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Nov;50(5):578-583. doi: 10.1002/uog.17401. Epub 2017 Oct 9.

    PubMed 28070914
  • Roberge S, Demers S, Berghella V, Chaillet N, Moore L, Bujold E. Impact of single- vs double-layer closure on adverse outcomes and uterine scar defect: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Nov;211(5):453-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.014. Epub 2014 Jun 6.

    PubMed 24912096
  • Stegwee SI, Ben AJ, El Alili M, van der Voet LF, de Groot CJM, Bosmans JE, Huirne JAF; 2Close study group. Cost-effectiveness of single-layer versus double-layer uterine closure during caesarean section on postmenstrual spotting: economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 2;11(7):e044340. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044340.

    PubMed 34215598
  • Jordans IPM, de Leeuw RA, Stegwee SI, Amso NN, Barri-Soldevila PN, van den Bosch T, Bourne T, Brolmann HAM, Donnez O, Dueholm M, Hehenkamp WJK, Jastrow N, Jurkovic D, Mashiach R, Naji O, Streuli I, Timmerman D, van der Voet LF, Huirne JAF. Sonographic examination of uterine niche in non-pregnant women: a modified Delphi procedure. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan;53(1):107-115. doi: 10.1002/uog.19049.

    PubMed 29536581

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Double-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section and Single-layer hysterorrhaphy at primary cesarean section in people with Cesarean Scar Defect (Isthmococele) and Pelvic Pain, run by Hédi Chaker Hospital at 1 site in Tunisia.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 8 inclusion and 13 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Tunisia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Residual Myometrial Thickness (RMT) at the Cesarean Scar at 6 Weeks and 6 Months (time frame: 6 weeks and 6 months after cesarean section). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07611331, which also lists 5 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 May 2026.

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in