Outcome in second- versus first-stage cesarean delivery in a teaching institution in Eastern India

American Journal of Perinatology

Volumn 27, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 507-512

  Seal, Subrata Lall ^a   Kamilya, Gourisankar ^a   Mukherji, Joydev ^a   Bhattacharyya, Subir Kr ^a   De, Alok ^a   Hazra, Avijit ^b  

^a R G KAR MEDICAL COLLEGE   (India)

^b INSTITUTE OF POST GRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH   (India)

Author keywords

Cesarean delivery; Maternal; Neonatal outcome; Second stage

Indexed keywords

ADULT; APGAR SCORE; ARTICLE; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; ENDOTRACHEAL INTUBATION; FEMALE; FETUS DISEASE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INDIA; INFECTION RATE; INSTITUTIONALIZATION; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; LABOR STAGE 1; LABOR STAGE 2; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NEONATAL SEIZURE; NEWBORN; NEWBORN DEATH; NULLIPARA; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEIZURE; SEPTICEMIA; TEACHING; WOUND INFECTION;

ADULT; APGAR SCORE; BIRTH INJURIES; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INDIA; LABOR STAGE, FIRST; LABOR STAGE, SECOND; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77952929256     PISSN: 07351631     EISSN: 10988785     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1248936     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Murphy D J., Liebling R E., Verity L, Swingler R, Patel R. Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in second stage of labour: a cohort study. Lancet 2001 358 1203-1207
2. Fasubaa O B., Ezechi O C., Orji E O. et al. Delivery of the impacted head of the fetus at caesarean section after prolonged obstructed labour: a randomised comparative study of two methods. J Obstet Gynaecol 2002 22 375-378
3. Allen V M., O'Connell C M., Baskett T F. Maternal and perinatal morbidity of caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation compared with caesarean delivery in the first stage of labour. BJOG 2005 112 986-990
4. Murphy D J. Failure to progress in the second stage of labour. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2001 13 557-561
5. Murphy D J., Liebling R E., Patel R, Verity L, Swingler R. Cohort study of operative delivery in the second stage of labour and standard of obstetric care. BJOG 2003 110 610-615
6. Alexander J M., Leveno K J., Rouse D J. et al, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU). Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes from primary cesarean delivery during the second compared with first stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2007 109 917-921
7. Rodriguez A I., Porter K B., O'Brien W F. Blunt versus sharp expansion of the uterine incision in low-segment transverse cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994 171 1022-1025
8. Cebekulu L, Buchmann E J. Complications associated with cesarean section in the second stage of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006 95 110-114
9. Selo-Ojeme D S., Sathiyathasan S, Fayyaz M. Caesearean delivery at full cervical dilatation versus caesarean delivery in the first stage of labor: comparison of maternal and perinatal morbidity. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2008 278 245-249
10. Gifford D S., Morton S C., Fiske M, Keesey J, Keeler E, Kahn K L. Lack of progress in labor as a reason for cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 2000 95 589-595
11. Spencer C, Murphy D, Bewley S. Caesarean delivery in the second stage of labour. BMJ 2006 333 613-614
12. Cunningham F G., Leveno K J., Bloom S L. et al. William's Obstetrics 22nd ed. New York McGraw Hill 2005 434-435