Caesarean delivery and subsequent pregnancy interval: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Volumn 13, Issue , 2013, Pages

  O'Neill, Sinéad M ^a   Kearney, Patricia M ^b   Kenny, Louise C ^c   Henriksen, Tine B ^d   Lutomski, Jennifer E ^a   Greene, Richard A ^a   Khashan, Ali S ^c  

^a Irish Centre for Fetal and Neonatal Translational Research   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

^d AARHUS UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; CINAHL; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COHORT ANALYSIS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; EMBASE; FACTUAL DATABASE; FAMILY PLANNING; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREGNANCY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

BIRTH INTERVALS; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFERTILITY, FEMALE; PARITY; PREGNANCY; RISK FACTORS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84883078338     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712393     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-165     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Roberts CL, Algert CS, Ford JB, Todd AL, Morris JM. Pathways to a rising caesarean section rate: a population-based cohort study. BMJ Open 2012, 2(5).
2. Orfali K. Beyond Numbers: The Multiple Cultural Meanings of Rising Cesarean Rates Worldwide. Am J Bioeth 2012, 12(7):54-56. 10.1080/15265161.2012.680544, 22694038.
3. Lavender T, Hofmeyr G, Neilson J, Kingdon C, Gyte G. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 3.
4. ICHSC The Information Centre for Health and Social Care England: Maternity Statistics, 2009-10 Publication date: November 18th 2010, ICHSC.
5. Hamilton BE, Hoyert DL, Martin JA, Strobino DM, Guyer B. Annual Summary of Vital Statistics: 2010-2011. Pediatr 2013, 131(3):548-558.
6. Chen MM, Hancock H. Women's knowledge of options for birth after Caesarean Section. Women Birth 2012, 25(3):e19-e26. 10.1016/j.wombi.2011.08.001, 21900064.
7. Murphy DJ, Stirrat GM, Heron J. The relationship between Caesarean section and subfertility in a population-based sample of 14 541 pregnancies. Hum Reprod 2002, 17(7):1914-1917. 10.1093/humrep/17.7.1914, 12093860.
8. Maheshwari A, Bhattacharya S, Johnson NP. Predicting fertility. Hum Fertil 2008, 11(2):109-117.
9. Bahl R, Strachan B, Murphy DJ. Outcome of subsequent pregnancy three years after previous operative delivery in the second stage of labour: cohort study. BMJ 2004, 328(7435):311-314. 10.1136/bmj.37942.546076.44, 338093, 14724128.
10. Collin SM, Marshall T, Filippi V. Caesarean section and subsequent fertility in sub-Saharan Africa. BJOG 2006, 113(3):276-283. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00846.x, 16487198.
11. Hemminki E. Impact of caesarean section on future pregnancy-a review of cohort studies. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1996, 10(4):366-379. 10.1111/j.1365-3016.1996.tb00062.x, 8931052.
12. Gurol-Urganci I, Bou-Antoun S, Lim C, Cromwell D, Mahmood T, Templeton A, van der Meulen J. Impact of Caesarean section on subsequent fertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2013, 28(7):1943-1952. 10.1093/humrep/det130, 23644593.
13. Porter M, Bhattacharya S, Van Teijlingen E, Templeton A. Does Caesarean section cause infertility?. Hum Reprod 2003, 18(10):1983-1986. 10.1093/humrep/deg402, 14507810.
14. Mollison J, Porter M, Campbell D, Bhattacharya S. Primary mode of delivery and subsequent pregnancy. BJOG 2005, 112(8):1061-1065. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00651.x, 16045518.
15. Jolly J, Walker J, Bhabra K. Subsequent obstetric performance related to primary mode of delivery. BJOG 1999, 106(3):227-232.
16. Tollanes MC, Melve KK, Irgens LM, Skjaerven R. Reduced fertility after cesarean delivery: a maternal choice. Obstet Gynecol 2007, 110(6):1256-1263. 10.1097/01.AOG.0000292089.18717.9f, 18055718.
17. Tower CL, Strachan BK, Baker PN. Long-term implications of caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol 2000, 20(4):365-367. 10.1080/01443610050111959, 15512585.
18. Smith GC, Wood AM, Pell JP, Dobbie R. First cesarean birth and subsequent fertility. Fertil Steril 2006, 85(1):90-95. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.1289, 16412736.
19. Smith GC, Pell JP, Dobbie R. Caesarean section and risk of unexplained stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy. Lancet 2003, 362(9398):1779-1784. 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14896-9, 14654315.
20. Pandian Z, Bhattacharya S, Templeton A. Review of unexplained infertility and obstetric outcome: a 10 year review. Hum Reprod 2001, 16(12):2593-2597. 10.1093/humrep/16.12.2593, 11726580.
21. Saraswat L, Porter M, Bhattacharya S, Bhattacharya S. Caesarean section and tubal infertility: is there an association?. Reprod Biomed Online 2008, 17(2):259-264. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60203-9, 18682001.
22. Khashan A, Kenny L. The effects of maternal body mass index on pregnancy outcome. Eur J Epidemiol 2009, 24(11):697-705. 10.1007/s10654-009-9375-2, 19653107.
23. Kenny LC, Lavender T, McNamee R, O'Neill SM, Mills T, Khashan AS. Advanced Maternal Age and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome: Evidence from a Large Contemporary Cohort. PLoS ONE 2013, 8(2):e56583. 10.1371/journal.pone.0056583, 3577849, 23437176.
24. Parikh NI, Cnattingius S, Mittleman MA, Ludvigsson JF, Ingelsson E. Subfertility and risk of later life maternal cardiovascular disease. Hum Reprod 2012, 27(2):568-575. 10.1093/humrep/der400, 3283089, 22131387.
25. Balen AH, Rutherford AJ. Management of infertility. BMJ 2007, 335(7620):608-611. 10.1136/bmj.39324.662049.80, 1988991, 17884905.
26. Previous caesarean delivery and subsequent pregnancy interval: a systematic review. PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews CRD42012003166 http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/register_new_review.asp?RecordID=3166&UserID=1850.
27. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009, 339:b2535. 10.1136/bmj.b2535, 2714657, 19622551.
28. Cochrane Review Manager (RevMan). 5.1 edn 2012, Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre: The Cochrane Collaboration, Cochrane.
29. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] 2011, The Cochrane Collaboration, Available from http://handbook.cochrane.org/.
30. McDonald SD, Murphy K, Beyene J, Ohlsson A. Perinatel outcomes of singleton pregnancies achieved by in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005, 27(5):449.
31. Albrechtsen S, Rasmussen S, Dalaker K, Irgens LM. Reproductive career after breech presentation: subsequent pregnancy rates, interpregnancy interval, and recurrence. Obstet Gynecol 1998, 92(3):345-350. 10.1016/S0029-7844(98)00176-8, 9721767.
32. Eijsink JJ, van der Leeuw-Harmsen L, van der Linden PJ. Pregnancy after Caesarean section: fewer or later?. Hum Reprod 2008, 23(3):543-547. 10.1093/humrep/dem428, 18216039.
33. Zdeb M, Therriault G, Logrillo V. Frequency, spacing, and outcome of pregnancies subsequent to primary cesarean childbirth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984, 150(2):205.
34. Huttly SR, Barros FC, Victora CG, Lombardi C, Vaughan JP. Subsequent pregnancies: who has them and who wants them? Observations from an urban center in southern Brazil. Rev Saude Publica 1990, 24(3):212-216. 10.1590/S0034-89101990000300007, 2094951.
35. LaSala A, Berkeley A. Primary cesarean section and subsequent fertility. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987, 157(2):379.
36. Hemminki E, Graubard BI, Hoffman HJ, Mosher WD, Fetterly K. Cesarean section and subsequent fertility: results from the 1982 National Survey of Family Growth. Fertil Steril 1985, 43(4):520-528.
37. Hemminki E. Pregnancy and birth after cesarean section: a survey based on the Swedish birth register. Birth 1987, 14(1):12-17. 10.1111/j.1523-536X.1987.tb01443.x, 3646886.
38. Bhattacharya S, Porter M, Harrild K, Naji A, Mollison J, Van Teijlingen E, Campbell D, Hall M, Templeton A. Absence of conception after caesarean section: voluntary or involuntary?. BJOG 2006, 113(3):268-275. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00853.x, 16487197.
39. Kjerulff KH, Velott DL, Zhu J, Chuang CH, Hillemeier MM, Paul IM, Repke JT. Mode of First Delivery and Women's Intentions for Subsequent Childbearing: Findings from the First Baby Study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2013, 27(1):62-71. 10.1111/ppe.12014, 23215713.
40. Joffe M, Key J, Best N, Keiding N, Scheike T, Jensen TK. Studying time to pregnancy by use of a retrospective design. Am J Epidemiol 2005, 162(2):115-124. 10.1093/aje/kwi172, 15972942.
41. Jensen TK, Scheike T, Keiding N, Schaumburg I, Grandjean P. Selection bias in determining the age dependence of waiting time to pregnancy. Am J Epidemiol 2000, 152(6):565-572. 10.1093/aje/152.6.565, 10997547.
42. Olsen J, Juul S, Basso O. Measuring time to pregnancy. Methodological issues to consider. Hum Reprod 1998, 13(7):1751-1753. 10.1093/humrep/13.7.1751, 9740411.
43. Baird DD, Weinberg CR, Schwingl P, Wilcox AJ. Selection bias associated with contraceptive practice in time-to-pregnancy studies. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2006, 709(1):156-164.
44. Olsen J. Design options and sources of bias in time-to-pregnancy studies. Scand J Work Environ Health 1999, 25(Suppl 1):5-7. discussion 76-8..
45. Bonde JP, Joffe M, Sallmén M, Kristensen P, Olsen J, Roeleveld N, Wilcox A. Validity issues relating to time-to-pregnancy studies of fertility. Epidemiol 2006, 17(4):347-349.
46. Jolly M, Sebire N, Harris J, Robinson S, Regan L. The risks associated with pregnancy in women aged 35 years or older. Hum Reprod 2000, 15(11):2433-2437. 10.1093/humrep/15.11.2433, 11056148.
47. Emmett C, Shaw A, Montgomery A, Murphy D. Women's experience of decision making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section: the role of health professionals and information about health risks. BJOG 2006, 113(12):1438-1445. 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01112.x, 17081180.
48. Moffat M, Bell J, Porter M, Lawton S, Hundley V, Danielian P, Bhattacharya S. Decision making about mode of delivery among pregnant women who have previously had a caesarean section: A qualitative study. BJOG 2006, 114(1):86-93.
49. Eden KB, Hashima JN, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Guise JM. Childbirth preferences after cesarean birth: a review of the evidence. Birth 2004, 31(1):49-60. 10.1111/j.0730-7659.2004.0274.x, 15015993.