OBJECTIVE: To estimate the maternal and perinatal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery involving the upper uterine segment compared with that of low transverse cesarean delivery. METHODS: A 19-year review of a perinatal database and the relevant charts was used to determine the maternal and perinatal morbidity associated with low transverse cesarean, classic cesarean, and inverted "T" cesarean deliveries. RESULTS: Over the 19 years, 1980-1998, there were 19,726 cesarean deliveries: low transverse cesarean, 19,422 (98.5%); classic cesarean, 221 (1.1%); and inverted T cesarean, 83 (0.4%). As a proportion of all cesarean deliveries, the rates of low transverse cesarean and classic cesarean have remained stable, whereas the rate of inverted T cesarean has risen from 0.2% to 0.9%. Maternal morbidity (puerperal infection, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, intensive care unit admission, death) and perinatal morbidity (stillborn fetus, neonatal death, 5 minute Apgar less than 7, intensive care) were significantly higher in classic cesarean compared to low transverse cesarean. Some maternal morbidity (puerperal infection, blood transfusion) and perinatal morbidity (5 minute Apgar less than 7, intensive care) were also significantly higher for inverted T cesarean compared to low transverse cesarean. CONCLUSION: Classic cesarean section has a higher maternal and perinatal morbidity than inverted T cesarean and much higher than low transverse cesarean. There is no increased maternal or perinatal morbidity if an attempted low transverse incision has to be converted to an inverted "T" incision compared to performing a classic cesarean section.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the maternal and perinatal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery involving the upper uterine segment compared with that of low transverse cesarean delivery. METHODS: A 19-year review of a perinatal database and the relevant charts was used to determine the maternal and perinatal morbidity associated with low transverse cesarean, classic cesarean, and inverted "T" cesarean deliveries. RESULTS: Over the 19 years, 1980-1998, there were 19,726 cesarean deliveries: low transverse cesarean, 19,422 (98.5%); classic cesarean, 221 (1.1%); and inverted T cesarean, 83 (0.4%). As a proportion of all cesarean deliveries, the rates of low transverse cesarean and classic cesarean have remained stable, whereas the rate of inverted T cesarean has risen from 0.2% to 0.9%. Maternal morbidity (puerperal infection, blood transfusion, hysterectomy, intensive care unit admission, death) and perinatal morbidity (stillborn fetus, neonatal death, 5 minute Apgar less than 7, intensive care) were significantly higher in classic cesarean compared to low transverse cesarean. Some maternal morbidity (puerperal infection, blood transfusion) and perinatal morbidity (5 minute Apgar less than 7, intensive care) were also significantly higher for inverted T cesarean compared to low transverse cesarean. CONCLUSION: Classic cesarean section has a higher maternal and perinatal morbidity than inverted T cesarean and much higher than low transverse cesarean. There is no increased maternal or perinatal morbidity if an attempted low transverse incision has to be converted to an inverted "T" incision compared to performing a classic cesarean section.
Authors: Tetsuya Kawakita; Uma M Reddy; Katherine L Grantz; Helain J Landy; Sameer Desale; Sara N Iqbal Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Uma M Reddy; Madeline Murguia Rice; William A Grobman; Jennifer L Bailit; Ronald J Wapner; Michael W Varner; John M Thorp; Kenneth J Leveno; Steve N Caritis; Mona Prasad; Alan T N Tita; George R Saade; Yoram Sorokin; Dwight J Rouse; Sean C Blackwell; Jorge E Tolosa Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-07-09 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Kim A Boggess; Alan Tita; Victoria Jauk; George Saade; Sherri Longo; Erin A S Clark; Sean Esplin; Kristin Cleary; Ronald Wapner; Kelli Letson; Michelle Owens; Sean Blackwell; Carmen Beamon; Jeffrey M Szychowski; William Andrews Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Mallory Whalen; Elizabeth Chang-Davidson; Terra Moran; Rachel Hoffman; Galit H Frydman; Alexander Slocum; Alissa Dangel Journal: J Med Device Date: 2020-12-18 Impact factor: 0.743