Étude prospective comparative entre les techniques de césarienne de Joël-Cohen et de Mouchel

In: Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction · 2007 · vol. 36(5) , pp. 447–450 · doi:10.1016/j.jgyn.2007.01.008 · PMID:17335999 · W1973920605
article OA: closed CC0
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the Joel-Cohen method for cesarean section to the traditional transrectal incision.MethodFifty-two patients requiring a caesarean section were enrolled in this prospective study. Overall morbidity and post-operative pain was assessed. Four surgeons participated to this study, each included 13 patients. The main judgement criterion was post-operative pain on the first day.ResultsPost-operative pain on the first day was less important (50 vs 23% p=0.04) in Joel-Cohen's. This method was shorter compared to the transrectal incision (33.6+6.4 min vs 51.2+8 min p<0.0001). There was no difference in overall morbidity between the two groups.ConclusionJoel-Cohen's method decrease post-operative pain and is a shorter procedure compared to the transrectal incision.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

References (16)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-05-14T06:52:15.578221+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK