Planned Vaginal Delivery Versus Planned Caesarean Section: Short-Term Medical Outcome Analyzed According to Intended Mode of Delivery

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada

Volumn 33, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 796-802

  Larsson, Christina ^a   Saltvedt, Sissel ^b   Wiklund, Ingela ^a   Andolf, Ellika ^a  

^a DANDERYD HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b STOCKHOLM SÖDER HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Caesarean section adverse effects; Cohort study; Excessive blood loss; Healthy primiparous women; Maternal complication; Postpartum infection

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANUS INJURY; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; ENDOMETRITIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFECTION RISK; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTESTINE OBSTRUCTION; LENGTH OF STAY; LUNG EMBOLISM; MATERNAL MORBIDITY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SOCIAL STATUS; SWEDEN; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; URINE RETENTION; VAGINA BLEEDING; VAGINAL DELIVERY; WOUND INFECTION; BREECH PRESENTATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DELIVERY; INFECTION; MATERNAL WELFARE; METHODOLOGY; PARITY; POSTPARTUM HEMORRHAGE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATION; QUESTIONNAIRE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BREECH PRESENTATION; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT STUDIES; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFECTION; MATERNAL WELFARE; PARITY; POSTPARTUM HEMORRHAGE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; SWEDEN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 81855223222     PISSN: 17012163     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34982-9     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Fenwick J., Gamble J., Hauck Y. Reframing birth: a consequence of cesarean section. J Adv Nurs 2006, 56:121-130. discussion 31-2.
2. Wax J.R., Cartin A., Pinette M.G., Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2004, 59:601-616.
3. Pakenham S., Chamberlain S.M., Smith G.N. Women's views on elective primary caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2006, 28:1089-1094.
4. Kingdon C., Baker L., Lavender T. Systematic review of nulliparous women's views of planned cesarean birth: the missing component in the debate about a term cephalic trial. Birth 2006, 33:229-237.
5. MacDorman M.F., Menacker F., Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol 2008, 35:293-307. v.
6. Socialstyrelsen. The Swedish Medical Birth Register. Available at:. Accessed June 5, 2009. http://www.sos.se.
7. Burrows L.J., Meyn L.A., Weber A.M. Maternal morbidity associated with vaginal versus cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2004, 103(5 Pt 1):907-912.
8. Liu S., Liston R.M., Joseph K.S., Heaman M., Sauve R., Kramer M.S. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ 2007, 176:455-460.
9. Hemminki E., Shelley J., Gissler M. Mode of delivery and problems in subsequent births: a register-based study from Finland. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005, 193:169-177.
10. Allen V.M., O'Connell C.M., Liston R.M., Baskett T.F. Maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery without labor compared with spontaneous onset of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol 2003, 102:477-482.
11. Liu S., Heaman M., Joseph K.S., Liston R.M., Huang L., Sauve R., et al. Risk of maternal postpartum readmission associated with mode of delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2005, 105:836-842.
12. Hemminki E., Merilainen J. Long-term effects of cesarean sections: ectopic pregnancies and placental problems. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996, 174:1569-1574.
13. Hannah M.E., Hannah W.J., Hewson S.A., Hodnett E.D., Saigal S., Willan A.R. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet 2000, 356(9239):1375-1383.
14. Hannah M.E., Hannah W.J., Hodnett E.D., Chalmers B., Kung R., Willan A., et al. Outcomes at 3 months after planned cesarean vs planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term: the international randomized Term Breech Trial. JAMA 2002, 287(14):1822-1831.
15. Torloni M.R., Daher S., Betran A.P., Widmer M., Montilla P., Souza J.P., et al. Portrayal of caesarean section in Brazilian women's magazines: 20 year review. BMJ 2011, 342:d276.
16. Wiklund I., Edman G., Larsson C., Andolf E. Personality and mode of delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006, 85:1225-1230.
17. Wiklund I., Edman G., Andolf E. Cesarean section on maternal request: reasons for the request, self-estimated health, expectations, experience of birth and signs of depression among first-time mothers. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2007, 86:451-456.
18. Wiklund I., Edman G., Ryding E.L., Andolf E. Expectation and experiences of childbirth in primiparae with caesarean section. BJOG 2008, 115:324-331.
19. Ekstrom A., Altman D., Wiklund I., Larsson C., Andolf E. Planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal delivery: comparison of lower urinary tract symptoms. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008, 19:459-465.
20. Wiklund I., Edman G., Larsson C., Andolf E. First-time mothers and changes in personality in relation to mode of delivery. J Adv Nurs 2009, 65:1636-1644.
21. Larsson C., Saltvedt S., Wiklund I., Pahlen S., Andolf E. Estimation of blood loss after cesarean section and vaginal delivery has low validity with a tendency to exaggeration. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006, 85:1448-1452.
22. Villar J., Carroli G., Zavaleta N., Donner A., Wojdyla D., Faundes A., et al. Maternal and neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: multicentre prospective study. BMJ 2007, 335(7628):1025.
23. Eriksson S.L., Olausson P.O., Olofsson C. Use of epidural analgesia and its relation to caesarean and instrumental deliveries-a population- based study of 94,217 primiparae. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006, 128(1-2):270-275.
24. Dahlgren L.S., von Dadelszen P., Christilaw J., Janssen P.A., Lisonkova S., Marquette G.P., et al. Caesarean section on maternal request: risks and benefits in healthy nulliparous women and their infants. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2009, 31:808-817.
25. Schindl M., Birner P., Reingrabner M., Joura E., Husslein P., Langer M. Elective cesarean section vs. spontaneous delivery: a comparative study of birth experience. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003, 82:834-840.
26. NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement on cesarean delivery on maternal request. NIH Consens State Sci Statements 2006, 23:1-29. 2006 Mar 27-29.
27. Leth R.A., Moller J.K., Thomsen R.W., Uldbjerg N., Norgaard M. Risk of selected postpartum infections after cesarean section compared with vaginal birth: a five-year cohort study of 32,468 women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009, 88:9761-9783.
28. Taylor L.K., Simpson J.M., Roberts C.L., Olive E.C., Henderson-Smart D.J. Risk of complications in a second pregnancy following caesarean section in the first pregnancy: a population-based study. Med J Aust 2005, 183:515-519.
29. Nisenblat V., Barak S., Griness O.B., Degani S., Ohel G., Gonen R. Maternal complications associated with multiple cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006, 108:21-26.
30. Bhattacharya S., Porter M., Harrild K., Naji A., Mollison J., van Teijlingen E., et al. Absence of conception after caesarean section: voluntary or involuntary?. BJOG 2006, 113:268-275.
31. Robson S., Carey A., Mishra R., Dear K. Elective caesarean delivery at maternal request: a preliminary study of motivations influencing women's decision-making. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008, 48:415-420.
32. Daltveit A.K., Tollanes M.C., Pihlstrom H., Irgens L.M. Cesarean delivery and subsequent pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol 2008, 111:1327-1334.
33. Hemminki E. Impact of caesarean section on future pregnancy-a review of cohort studies. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1996, 10:366-379.
34. Sobande A., Eskandar M. Multiple repeat caesarean sections: complications and outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2006, 28:193-197.
35. Armson B.A. Is planned cesarean childbirth a safe alternative? CMAJ. Feb 2007, 176:475-476.
36. Pallasmaa N, Ekblad U, Aitokallio-Tallberg A, Uotila J, Raudaskoski T, Ulander VM, et al. Cesarean delivery in Finland: maternal complications and obstetric risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 89:896-902.