In short
- Three layers, three different consequences, described by three independent papers: Scarpa’s fascia, the peritoneum and the endometrium.
- 🔑 What the obstetrician closes conditions what is found years later, and that is published for all three planes.
- ⚠️ But the long-term aesthetic result has not been measured in any trial. Preventing the shelf is a reasoned proposal, not a proven fact.
- What has been trialled is something else: closing the subcutaneous tissue against wound complications, and there a 2025 meta-analysis found no benefit when it is applied universally.
- For the peritoneum the evidence is more favourable: closing it was associated with fewer adhesions in a meta-analysis of 33 studies.
- And for the uterus there is a growing consensus: including the endometrium in the suture is linked to niches, adenomyosis and scar endometriosis.
- 🚨 None of this is a way of judging a caesarean that has already happened. The technique is chosen for maternal and fetal safety, often under urgency, and preventing later problems is one factor, not the main one.
Much of what appears years after a caesarean depends on which layers were closed during the operation. This is not a hunch: there are three independent papers, on three different planes, pointing the same way — Scarpa’s fascia and the bulge in the wall, the peritoneum and adhesions, the endometrium and the niche in the uterine scar.
And the other half has to be said straight away, because this page is worthless without it: the existence of a proposed mechanism does not mean it has been demonstrated that closing those layers prevents the aesthetic problem. Nobody has measured it. This page sets out what is proposed, what has been proven, what has not, and how to raise it with your obstetrician without turning it into a reproach.
This page closes the path opened by caesarean scar problems: why they happen and what has been proposed so that they do not.
The three layers
It is what orders this whole page, and it is worth seeing together.
| Layer | If it is not closed properly | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Scarpa’s fascia (the wall, intermediate plane) | Its edges retract, the deep fat herniates and the scar is tethered: this is the shelf or “apron” | Pelosi, 2026 |
| Peritoneum (the inner lining) | More adhesions at the next caesarean | Shi, 2011 |
| Endometrium (the inner layer of the uterus, in the uterine suture) | Altered healing, with niches or isthmoceles, adenomyosis and scar endometriosis | Bujold, 2026 |
🔑 Three papers that do not cite one another reaching the same conclusion from three different planes. It is as close to a convergence as you can get without a trial to prove it: what is decided to be closed in the delivery theatre is what will later have to be repaired, monitored or not.
What is proposed for the shelf
The paper that described the caesarean “apron” proposes systematically closing Scarpa’s fascia — routine in abdominal surgery and the exception in obstetrics — and argues that doing so could improve long-term aesthetic and functional results without adding to the morbidity of the operation (Pelosi, 2026).
The reasoning is sound: if the mechanism of the shelf is that this layer is left open and its edges retract, closing it ought to prevent it.
⚠️ And here is the limit, which is the part of this page that cannot be left out. That paper proposes; it does not demonstrate. What has been trialled is a similar but different question: whether closing the subcutaneous tissue reduces wound complications. A meta-analysis of eight trials and 1,854 women concluded that doing so universally does not significantly reduce wound infection (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.69–1.31) or the composite outcome (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.80–1.38) (Bonanni, 2025).
🔑 Read that carefully, because it does not say what it appears to. That meta-analysis measures wound complications, not how the abdomen looks two years later. The long-term aesthetic result of closing Scarpa’s fascia has not been measured by anyone. So the honest statement is: there is a well-argued mechanism, there is a published proposal, and there is no proof.
What is known about the other two planes
The peritoneum. A meta-analysis of 33 studies and 4,423 women compared three caesarean techniques and found that closing the peritoneum was associated with fewer adhesions, with an odds ratio of 0.28 (95% CI 0.10–0.82) in the direct comparison (Shi, 2011). It is the most favourable evidence of the three.
The uterus. A 2026 review of uterine closure technique documents that when the endometrium is included in the suture, healing is altered, and describes the appearance of niches or isthmoceles, adenomyosis and endometriosis in the area of the scar. It proposes a three-layer closure that deliberately excludes the superficial endometrium and argues that a proper repair should take precedence over a quick one (Bujold, 2026).
The consequences of that plane — the isthmocele is extremely common, around 45.6% on ultrasound at six months — are in shelf, hernia or isthmocele, and scar endometriosis in the lump that hurts with your period.
How to raise it, and how not to
This is the practical part, and also the most delicate.
How to. As an informed question, at the antenatal appointment and not in theatre: “I have read that there is a proposal to close Scarpa’s fascia to reduce the bulge afterwards. What do you think?”. It is a legitimate conversation between an informed patient and her team.
How not to. As a demand, as a list of conditions or as an insinuation that someone did it badly.
🚨 And there are three underlying reasons for that care, worth understanding before any technique.
- A caesarean is done for maternal and fetal safety, and often under urgency. In that context, operating time and haemostasis take precedence over the long-term aesthetic result, and rightly so.
- The proposal about Scarpa’s fascia dates from 2026. Nobody did anything wrong by not applying it before it existed.
- It is not demonstrated. Asking for an unproven measure to be applied as though it were proven is asking badly.
⚠️ And one more thing: none of this is any use for judging a caesarean in retrospect. If you already have a shelf, knowing why it formed helps you understand and treat it — not assign responsibility. The ladder of treatment is in how the surgery is decided.
What does depend on you
Little, and it is worth not overstating it:
- Not smoking is, on its own, what most influences how any wound heals.
- Weight and blood glucose control in pregnancy are among the factors associated with poorer uterine healing: in the isthmocele cohort, body mass index and gestational diabetes were associated with greater risk (Antila-Långsjö, 2018 — cited on the isthmocele page).
- And treating the scar early, which is the only thing with a clear window: the laser protocol pays off within the first three months and not afterwards. It is in the laser protocol for the caesarean scar.
Book an appointment
You can book your own appointment. Pick the day and time from the free slots in the diary, in a panel that opens right here, without leaving this page.
Frequently asked questions
Can the caesarean shelf be avoided?
There is a proposal published in 2026 — systematically closing Scarpa’s fascia — with a well-argued mechanism behind it. What there is not is a trial that has measured the long-term aesthetic result, so it cannot be said to be demonstrated.
Can I ask for that layer to be closed?
It is a reasonable conversation with your obstetric team, better at the antenatal appointment than in theatre, and framed as an informed question rather than a demand. The technical decision belongs to whoever operates on you.
If it was not closed for me, did they do it badly?
No. A caesarean is done for maternal and fetal safety, frequently under urgency, and the technique is chosen on those criteria. The proposal also dates from 2026 and is not demonstrated: not applying it is not an error.
And closing the peritoneum?
There the evidence is more favourable: a meta-analysis of 33 studies found fewer adhesions where the peritoneum was closed. It is a different plane and a different consequence, and it too is part of the technical decisions of a caesarean.
What is this three-layer closure of the uterus?
It is a 2026 proposal on how to suture the uterus excluding the superficial endometrium, because including it is linked to poorer healing and to niches, adenomyosis and endometriosis in the scar. It affects gynaecological consequences, not the appearance of the abdomen.
Is there anything I can do myself to make it turn out better?
Not smoking is what matters most. And, after the birth, treating the scar early: the laser protocol pays off within the first three months, and starting after three months was indistinguishable from not treating at all.
If I already have the shelf, is this any use to me?
For understanding why it formed, which is no small thing: it explains why it does not respond to diet or exercise. For correcting it, the route is different and it is set out in the treatment pages.
Sources
- Pelosi MA 2nd, Pelosi MA 3rd, Romero R. The cesarean apron: description, proposed pathophysiology, classification, and prevention through Scarpa fascia closure at cesarean delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2026;233(6S):S118-S128. PMID 41485815 — Describes the mechanism of the bulge and proposes systematic closure of Scarpa’s fascia as prevention, arguing that it could improve long-term aesthetic and functional results without adding to the morbidity. It is a proposal, and this page says so. Verified 29-08-2026.
- Bonanni G, Nguyen V, Francescutti M, Shamshirsaz AA, Berghella V. Subcutaneous tissue closure and postoperative wound complications in cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM. 2025;7(9):101724. PMID 40541861 — Eight trials and 1,854 participants (918 with closure, 936 without). Closing the subcutaneous tissue applied universally did not significantly reduce wound infection (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.69–1.31), dehiscence, seroma, haematoma or the composite (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.80–1.38). It measures wound complications, not the aesthetic result, and that distinction is the axis of this page. Verified 29-08-2026.
- Shi Z, Ma L, Yang Y, et al. Adhesion formation after previous caesarean section — a meta-analysis and systematic review. BJOG. 2011;118(4):410-422. PMID 21176087 — A meta-analysis of 33 studies and 4,423 women comparing caesarean techniques. Closing the peritoneum was associated with fewer adhesions (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.10–0.82 in the direct comparison). It is the most favourable evidence of the three planes. Verified 29-08-2026.
- Bujold E, Romero R. Uterine closure after cesarean delivery: surgical technique, biological rationale, and clinical implications. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2026;233(6S):S82-S102. PMID 41485855 — A review of uterine closure: including the endometrium in the suture alters healing and is associated with niches or isthmoceles, adenomyosis and scar endometriosis. It proposes a three-layer closure that excludes it and argues that a proper repair should take precedence over a quick one. Verified 29-08-2026.
Book your consultation
If you already have the shelf, this page explains why it formed but does not correct it: that is what the assessment is for, where we look at whether there is adhesion, how much skin is in excess and how far the laxity extends. And if your caesarean is recent, what does have a window is treating the scar, which pays off within the first three months.
Clinical confirmation by the surgeon
Registration no. 46/4624077
Registration no. 46/4624503
Last reviewed: 6 September 2026. This content is for information only and does not replace an individual assessment by a healthcare professional.
