Current thinking on maternal and neonatal morbidity related to cesarean section

References

• Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Sutton PD. Births: preliminary data for 2003. Natl Vital Stat. Rep.53, 1–18 (2004).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thomas J, Paranjothy S. National Sentinel Cesarean Section Audit Report. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit, London, UK (2001).
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet2, 436–437 (1985).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumont A, deBernis L, Bouvier-Colle MH, Breart G; for the MOMA Study Group. Cesarean section rate for maternal indication in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review. Lancet358, 1328–1334 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weil O, Fernandez H. Is safe motherhood an orphan initiative? Lancet354, 940–943 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Caesarean Section: Clinical Guideline. RCOG Press, London, UK (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Hall MH, Bewley S. Maternal mortality and mode of delivery. Lancet354, 776 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Evaluation of cesarean Delivery. ACOG, DC, USA (2000).
   Google Scholar
• Electronic Fetal Monitoring. Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline Number 8. CESU, RCOG, London, UK (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Verity L, Swingler R, Patel R. Cohort study of the early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in the second stage of labour. Lancet358, 1203–1207 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel RR, Peters TJ, Murphy DJ, and the ALSPAC Study Team. Prenatal risk factors for caesarean section. Analyses of the ALSPAC chort of 12,944 women in England. Int. J. Epidemiol.34, 353–367 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anim-Somuah M, Smyth R, Howell C. Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.4, CD000331 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hodnett ED, Gates S, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.3, CD003766 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Gupta JK, Hofmeyr GJ. Position for women during second stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.3, CD002006. pub2 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• The National Institute for Clinical Excellence, The Scottish Executive Health Department, and The Department for Health Social Services and Public Safety: Northern Ireland. Why Mothers Die 1997–1999 The Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in the United Kingdom.5, 1–365. RCOG Press, London, UK (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Liu S, Heaman M, Kramer MS, Demissie K, Wen SW, Marcoux S. Length of hospital stay, obstetric conditions at childbirth, and maternal readmission: a population-based cohort study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.187, 681–687 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brace V, Penney G, Hall M. Quantifying severe maternal morbidity: a Scottish population study. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.111, 481–484 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Donnelly V, Fynes M, Campbell D, Johnson H, O’Connell PR, O’Herlihy C. Obstetric events leading to anal sphincter damage. Obstet. Gynecol.92, 955–961 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Leeuw JW, Struijk PC, Vierhout ME, Wallenburg HC. Risk factors for third degree perineal ruptures during delivery. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.108, 383–387 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Fynes M, Donnelly VS, O’Connell PR, O’Herlihy C. Cesarean delivery and anal sphincter injury. Obstet. Gynecol.92, 496–500 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Patel RR, Peters TJ, Murphy DJ; ALSPAC Study Team. Operative delivery and postnatal depression? A cohort study. Br. Med. J.330, 576–580 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Patel RR, Liebling RE, Murphy DJ. Effect of operative delivery in the second stage of labor on breastfeeding success. Birth30, 255–260 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebling RE, Swingler R, Patel RR, Verity L, Soothill PW, Murphy DJ. Pelvic floor morbidity up to one year after difficult instrumental delivery and cesarean section in the second stage of labor: a cohort study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.191, 4–10 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahl R, Strachan B, Murphy DJ. Pelvic floor morbidity at three years after instrumental delivery and caesarean section in the second stage of labor and the impact of a subsequent delivery. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.192, 789–794 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bahl R, Strachan B, Murphy DJ. Outcome of subsequent pregnancy three years after previous operative delivery in the second stage of labour – cohort study. Br. Med. J.328, 311–314 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jolly J, Walker J, Bhabra K. Subsequent obstetric performance related to primary mode of delivery. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.106, 227–232 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Porter M, Bhattacharya S, van Teijlingen E, Templeton A. Reproductive Outcome Following cesarean Section (ROCS) Collaborative Group. Does caesarean section cause infertility? Hum. Reprod.18(10), 1983–1986 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy DJ, Stirrat GM, Heron J; ALSPAC Study Team. The relationship between caesarean section and subfertility in a population-based sample of 14,541 pregnancies. Hum. Reprod.17, 1914–1917 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith GC, Wood AM, Pell JP, Dobbie R. First cesarean birth and subsequent fertility. Fertil. Steril.85(1), 90–95 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menage J. Post-traumatic stress disorder after childbirth: the phenomenon of traumatic birth. Can. Med. Assoc. J.156, 831–835 (1997).
   Google Scholar
• DiMatteo MR, Morton SC, Lepper HS et al. Cesarean childbirth and psychosocial outcomes: a meta-analysis. Health Psychology. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination15, 303–314 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher J, Astbury J, Smith A. Adverse psychological impact of operative obstetric interventions: a prospective longitudinal study. Aust. NZ J. Psychiat.31, 728–738 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck CT. Post-traumatic stress disorder due to childbirth: the aftermath. Nurs. Res.53, 216–224 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Badawi N, Kurinczuk JJ, Keogh JM et al. Intrapartum risk factors for newborn encephalopathy: the Western Australian case–control study. Br. Med. J.317, 1554–15558 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaffney G, Sellers S, Flavell V, Squier M, Johnson A. Case-control study of intrapartum care, cerebral palsy, and perinatal death. Br. Med. J.308, 743–750 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Draycott T, Fox R, Montague I. Shoulder dystocia. In: Green Top Guideline. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, UK (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Towner D, Castro MA, Eby-Wilkens E, Gilbert WM. Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. N. Engl. J. Med.341, 1709–1714 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Patel R, Verity L, Swingler R. Cohort study of operative delivery in the second stage of labour and standard of obstetric care. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.110, 610–615 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Strachan B, Murphy DJ. Operative vaginal delivery. In: Green Top Guideline No 26. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, UK (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Kozak LJ, Weeks JD. U.S. trends in obstetric procedures, 1990–2000. Birth29, 157–161 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maternity Center Association. Listening to Mothers: Report of the First National U.S. Survey of Women’s Childbearing Experiences Executive Summary and Recommendations Issued by the Maternity Center Association. Maternity Center Association, NY, USA (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman E, Ernst EK, Rooks JP et al. Results of the national study of vaginal birth after cesarean in birth centers. Obstet. Gynecol.104, 933–942 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windrim R. Vaginal delivery in birth centre after previous caesarean section. Lancet365, 106–107 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. SOGC Clinical Practice Guidelines. Guidelines for vaginal birth after previous caesarean birth. Number 155, February 2005. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet.89, 319–331 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy DJ, Pope C, Frost J, Liebling RE. Women’s views on the impact of operative delivery in the second stage of labour – qualitative study. Br. Med. J.327, 1132–1135 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy DJ, Liebling RE. Cohort study of maternal views on future mode of delivery following operative delivery in the second stage of labor. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.188, 542–548 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodd J, Pearce E, Crowther C. Women’s experiences and preferences following Caesarean birth. Aust. NZ J. Obstet. Gynaecol.44, 521–524 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMahon MJ, Luther ER, Bowes WA, Olshan AF. Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective cesarean section. N. Engl. J. Med.335, 689–695 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozurkewich EL, Hutton EK. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.183, 1187–1197 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, Martin DP. Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery. N. Engl. J. Med.345, 3–8 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson EL, Lawrenson RA, Nightingale AL, Farmer RDT. Venous thromboembolism in pregnancy and the puerperium: incidence and additional risk factors from a London perinatal database. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.108, 56–60 (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Smith GC, Pell JP, Cameron AD, Dobbie R. Risk of perinatal death associated with labor after previous cesarean delivery in uncomplicated term pregnancies. JAMA287, 2684–2690 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rortveit G, Daltveit AK, Hannestad YS, Hunskaar S, for the Norwegian EPICONT Study. Urinary incontinence after vaginal delivery or cesarean section. N. Engl. J. Med.348, 900–907 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christianson LM, Bovberg VE, McDavitt EC, Hulfish KL. Risk factors for perineal injury during delivery. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.189, 255–260 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith GC, Pell JP, Pasupathy D, Dobbie R. Factors predisposing to perinatal death related to uterine rupture during attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section: retrospective cohort study. Br. Med. J.329(7462), 375 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N. Engl. J. Med.351(25), 2581–2589 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wen SW, Rusen ID, Walker M et al. Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.191, 1263–1269 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison JJ, Rennie JM, Milton PJ. Neonatal respiratory morbidity and mode of delivery at term – influence of timing of elective caesarean section. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.102, 101–106 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shorten A, Shorten B, Keogh J, West S, Morris J. Making choices for childbirth: a randomized controlled trial of a decision-aid for informed birth after cesarean. Birth32(4), 252–261 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pare E, Quinones JN, Macones GA. Vaginal birth after cesarean section versus elective repeat caesarean section: assessment of downstream health outcomes. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.113(1), 75–85 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, Martin DP. First-birth cesarean and placental abruption or previa at second birth. Obstet. Gynecol.97(5 Pt 1), 765–769 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faiz AS, Ananth CV. Etiology and risk factors for placenta previa: an overview and meta-analysis of observational studies. J. Matern. Fetal Neonatal Med.13(3), 175–190 (2003).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith GC, Pell JP, Dobbie R. cesarean section and risk of unexplained stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy. Lancet362(9398), 1779–1784 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet356(9239), 1375–1383 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rietberg CC, Elferink-Stinkens, Visser GH. The effect of the Term Breech Trial on medical intervention behaviour and neonatal outcome in The Netherlands: an analysis of 35,453 term breech infants. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.112(2), 205–209 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Glezerman M. Five years to the term breech trial: the rise and fall of a randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.194, 20–25 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmeyr GJ, Hannah ME. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.3, CD000166 (2003).
   Google Scholar
• Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hodnett ED et al. Outcomes at 3 months after planned caesarean section vs planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial. JAMA287(14), 1822–1831 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannah ME, Whyte H, Hannah WJ et al. Maternal outcomes at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.191(3), 917–927 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whyte H, Hannah ME, Saigal S et al. Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.191(3), 864–871 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gamble JA, Creedy DK. Women’s request for a caesarean section: a critique of the literature. Birth27, 256–263 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner M. Choosing caesarean section. Lancet356, 1677–1680 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bewley S, Cockburn J. The unethics of ‘request’ caesarean section. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.109, 593–596 (2002).
   Google Scholar
• Ecker JL. Once a pregnancy, always a cesarean. Rationale and feasibility of a randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol.190(2), 314–318 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Ramalingam U, Libby G, Murphy DJ. Obstetric management of a woman’s first delivery and the implications for pelvic floor surgery in later life. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.112, 1043–1046 (2005).
   Google Scholar