Background: Caesarean section rates continue to raise concerns due to their steady rise, especially in middle- and high-income countries.
Aim of the work: The purse string double layer technique [Turan technique] and the conventional double layer method for closing the uterine incision following caesarean section were compared in the postoperative findings of this study.
Patients and Methods: Eighty subjects divided randomly into two groups:  Group [I]: pregnant women underwent uterine incision closure by classic double layer technique. Group [II]: pregnant women underwent uterine incision closure by purse string double layer [Turan] technique. Patients were examined and evaluated at the out -patient Gynecology Clinic in Al-Azhar University Hospital [Damietta].
Results: The length of the uterine closure and the overall operation duration, which were greater in Group II, as well as the length of the Kerr incision after suturing [cm], which was shown to be longer in Group I, were both highly statistically significant differences between the two groups. Additionally, there were more statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of the length of the Kerr incision before suturing [cm], the number of patients who needed additional sutures for haemostasis, the levels of haemoglobin before and after surgery, the amount of blood lost during the procedure, and the level of pain after the procedure.
Conclusion: Based on the results of this study, Turan technique associated with better cesarean scar healing as regard [RMT, incidence of CS defect, scar length] than classic double layer technique.