(Can J Anaesth. 2015;62(11):1209–1220)
In 2009, a meta-analysis was published comparing 2 different methods of uterine repair: uterine exteriorization and in situ repair. Over 3000 patients were included in this analysis, which showed no noticeable difference in outcomes between the 2 methods. Since then, 5 trials have been published comparing these 2 methods, increasing the studied patient population to over 16,000. With this wealth of data coming from a series of new trials, the authors of this paper undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing perioperative outcomes for uterine exteriorization versus in situ repair during cesarean delivery.