Literature DB >> 17400854

Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes from primary cesarean delivery during the second compared with first stage of labor.

James M Alexander1, Kenneth J Leveno, Dwight J Rouse, Mark B Landon, Sharon Gilbert, Catherine Y Spong, Michael W Varner, Atef H Moawad, Steve N Caritis, Margaret Harper, Ronald J Wapner, Yoram Sorokin, Menachem Miodovnik, Mary J O'Sullivan, Baha M Sibai, Oded Langer, Steven G Gabbe.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare maternal and neonatal outcomes when primary cesarean delivery is performed in the second stage of labor compared with the first stage.
METHODS: Between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2000, a prospective observational study of primary cesarean deliveries was conducted at 13 university centers comprising the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The primary outcomes of interest included a maternal composite (composed of at least one of the following: endometritis, intraoperative surgical complication, blood transfusion, or wound complication) and neonatal composite (which included at least one of the following: Apgar score of 3 or less at 5 minutes, neonatal death, neonatal intensive care unit admission, seizure, delivery room intubation in the absence of meconium, or fetal injury).
RESULTS: A total of 11,981 cesarean deliveries were available for analysis: 9,265 were performed in the first stage and 2,716 in the second stage. Cesarean deliveries performed in the second stage were associated with longer operative times, epidural analgesia, chorioamnionitis, and higher birth weight (all P<.001). The maternal composite index was slightly increased in women undergoing cesarean delivery in the second stage of labor, primarily due to uterine atony, uterine incision extension, and incidental cystotomy. This difference was significant after multivariable analysis (odds ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.37). After multivariable analysis, the neonatal composite did not differ significantly between groups (odds ratio 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.84-1.08).
CONCLUSION: Cesarean delivery in the second stage of labor is associated with slightly increased maternal but not neonatal composite morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17400854     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000257121.56126.fe

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  17 in total

1.  Infectious morbidity is higher after second-stage compared with first-stage cesareans.

Authors:  Methodius G Tuuli; Lucy Liu; Ryan E Longman; Anthony O Odibo; George A Macones; Alison G Cahill
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Trial of labor after cesarean: attempted operative vaginal delivery versus emergency repeat cesarean, a prospective national cohort study.

Authors:  A L Rietveld; N Kok; B M Kazemier; C J M de Groot; P W Teunissen
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 2.521

3.  Second stage caesarean section: evaluation of patwardhan technique.

Authors:  Pradip Kumar Saha; Richa Gulati; Poonam Goel; Rimpy Tandon; Anju Huria
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-01-12

4.  Perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality after attempted operative vaginal delivery at midpelvic station.

Authors:  Giulia M Muraca; Yasser Sabr; Sarka Lisonkova; Amanda Skoll; Rollin Brant; Geoffrey W Cundiff; K S Joseph
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Incidence of severe adverse neonatal outcomes: use of a composite indicator in a population cohort.

Authors:  Samantha J Lain; Charles S Algert; Natasha Nassar; Jennifer R Bowen; Christine L Roberts
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2012-04

6.  Cesarean in the second stage: a possible risk factor for subsequent spontaneous preterm birth.

Authors:  Vincenzo Berghella; Alexis C Gimovsky; Lisa D Levine; Joy Vink
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Evaluation of delivery options for second-stage events.

Authors:  Jennifer L Bailit; William A Grobman; Madeline Murguia Rice; Ronald J Wapner; Uma M Reddy; Michael W Varner; John M Thorp; Steve N Caritis; Jay D Iams; George Saade; Dwight J Rouse; Jorge E Tolosa
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Neonatal outcomes and operative vaginal delivery versus cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Stephen A Contag; Rebecca G Clifton; Steven L Bloom; Catherine Y Spong; Michael W Varner; Dwight J Rouse; Susan M Ramin; Steve N Caritis; Alan M Peaceman; Yoram Sorokin; Anthony Sciscione; Marshall W Carpenter; Brian M Mercer; John M Thorp; Fergal D Malone; Jay D Iams
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2010-01-22       Impact factor: 1.862

9.  Risk factors for bladder injury in patients with a prior hysterotomy.

Authors:  Alison G Cahill; Molly J Stout; David M Stamilio; Anthony O Odibo; Jeffrey F Peipert; George A Macones
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Risk factors associated with preterm birth after a prior term delivery.

Authors:  L F Wong; J Wilkes; K Korgenski; M W Varner; T A Manuck
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 6.531

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.