Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common and serious healthcare-associated infection that increase morbidity, hospital stay, costs, and patient dissatisfaction, and they remain a significant concern following caesarean section (CS), the most frequently performed abdominal surgery worldwide. SSI rates after CS range from 2–10%, with superficial, deep, and organ/space infections contributing to delayed recovery, readmission, reoperation, and long-term morbidity. While SSIs are multifactorial in origin, surgical sutures play a key role because they are foreign materials placed directly in the wound and can act as a nidus for bacterial colonization, particularly at suture knots. Appropriate suture selection depends on biological compatibility, mechanical performance, wound tension, tissue characteristics, and handling properties, all of which influence wound healing and infection risk. To reduce bacterial colonization, antibacterial-coated sutures have been developed, most notably triclosan-coated sutures. Triclosan is a broad-spectrum antibacterial agent effective against common SSI pathogens, with proven in vitro, in vivo, and clinical evidence showing reduced bacterial adhesion and lower SSI rates. Based on this evidence, both the World Health Organization and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommend the use of triclosan-coated sutures to reduce the risk of SSIs. Vicryl Plus Triclosan-Coated Polyglactin 910 sutures have been widely utilized in caesarean section wound closure. To further expand available treatment options, it is important to demonstrate that other triclosan coated polyglactin 910 sutures, such as Trusynth Plus Neo, can deliver equivalent outcomes. Thus, this study is designed to compare the clinical equivalence of Trusynth Plus Neo (triclosan coated polyglactin 910 suture) with Vicryl Plus (triclosan coated polyglactin 910 suture) in caesarean section wound closure.