OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate number and timing of elective cesarean sections at term and to assess perinatal outcome associated with this timing. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a recent retrospective cohort study including all elective cesarean sections of singleton pregnancies at term (n = 20,973) with neonatal follow-up. Primary outcome was defined as a composite of neonatal mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: More than half of the neonates were born at <39 weeks of gestation, and they were at significantly higher risk for the composite primary outcome than neonates born thereafter. The absolute risks were 20.6% and 12.5% for birth at <38 and 39 weeks, respectively, as compared to 9.5% for neonates born > or = 39 weeks. The corresponding adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) were 2.4 (2.1-2.8) and 1.4 (1.2-1.5), respectively. CONCLUSION: More than 50% of the elective cesarean sections are applied at <39 weeks, thus jeopardizing neonatal outcome. Copyright 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate number and timing of elective cesarean sections at term and to assess perinatal outcome associated with this timing. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a recent retrospective cohort study including all elective cesarean sections of singleton pregnancies at term (n = 20,973) with neonatal follow-up. Primary outcome was defined as a composite of neonatal mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: More than half of the neonates were born at <39 weeks of gestation, and they were at significantly higher risk for the composite primary outcome than neonates born thereafter. The absolute risks were 20.6% and 12.5% for birth at <38 and 39 weeks, respectively, as compared to 9.5% for neonates born > or = 39 weeks. The corresponding adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) were 2.4 (2.1-2.8) and 1.4 (1.2-1.5), respectively. CONCLUSION: More than 50% of the elective cesarean sections are applied at <39 weeks, thus jeopardizing neonatal outcome. Copyright 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Elizabeth Bates; Dwight J Rouse; Merry Lynn Mann; Victoria Chapman; Waldemar A Carlo; Alan T N Tita Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Julie Gutman; Dyson Mwandama; Ryan E Wiegand; Doreen Ali; Don P Mathanga; Jacek Skarbinski Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2013-06-24 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Lindsay S Womack; William M Sappenfield; Cheryl L Clark; Washington C Hill; Robert W Yelverton; John S Curran; Linda A Detman; Vani R Bettegowda Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2014-10
Authors: Alan Thevenet N Tita; Yinglei Lai; Steven L Bloom; Catherine Y Spong; Michael W Varner; Susan M Ramin; Steve N Caritis; William A Grobman; Yoram Sorokin; Anthony Sciscione; Marshall W Carpenter; Brian M Mercer; John M Thorp; Fergal D Malone; Margaret Harper; Jay D Iams Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Alan T N Tita; Yinglei Lai; Mark B Landon; Catherine Y Spong; Kenneth J Leveno; Michael W Varner; Steve N Caritis; Paul J Meis; Ronald J Wapner; Yoram Sorokin; Alan M Peaceman; Mary J O'Sullivan; Baha M Sibai; John M Thorp; Susan M Ramin; Brian M Mercer Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 7.661