LAUSR

Dear Editor, First of all, we thank Prof. Matsubara greatly for his comment on our article and for his many innovative contributions in the study of uterine compression sutures (UCS). The five UCS methods we established are used for addressing different causes of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), such as uterine atony, placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorder, lower uterine bleeding (LUB), and so on. Patients with PPH caused by different causes mentioned above can be hospitalized at the same time during a certain period of time, so different UCSs may be used in different cases. This is because there is no single suture method that can solve all PPH problems, even if B-Lynch sutured is not sufficiently effective for LUB or PAS. Therefore, we simultaneously applied a variety of suturing hemostasis for different diseases resulting in PPH. At this time, the X, Y, and Z suture methods must be performed on different patients. What’s more, science always looks for different solutions to a problem so as to choose the best choice. This is exactly the original intention of science and as Prof. Matsubara said “surgeons usually employ one procedure and then another in a trial-and-error manner, finally establishing a new procedure.” To be frank, our UCSs may have some flaws, for example, funnel suture. Due to the long suture span, the suture is not tight enough for some uteruses. We have improved it to a modified funnel suture without