Uterine incision-to-delivery interval and perinatal outcomes in transverse versus vertical incisions in preterm cesarean deliveries

Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine

Volumn 26, Issue 18, 2013, Pages 1788-1791

  Luthra, Gauri ^a   Gawade, Prasad ^a   Starikov, Roman ^a   Markenson, Glenn ^a  

^a Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

Maternal and neonatal morbidity; Obstetric surgical procedures; Uterine incision

Indexed keywords

ADULT; APGAR SCORE; ARTICLE; BRAIN HEMORRHAGE; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DELIVERY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; FETOMATERNAL TRANSFUSION; HUMAN; INCISION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL MORBIDITY; NEWBORN; NEWBORN MORTALITY; PERFORMANCE; PERINATAL MORBIDITY; PREMATURITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; UTERINE INCISION;

ADULT; APGAR SCORE; CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT MORTALITY; INFANT, NEWBORN; INFANT, PREMATURE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREMATURE BIRTH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS; UTERUS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84887911455     PISSN: 14767058     EISSN: 14764954     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2013.811226     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Menacker F, Hamilton BE. Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States. NCHS Data Brief 2010;35:1-8.
2. Patterson LS, O'Connell CM, Baskett TF. Maternal and perinatal morbidity associated with classic and inverted T cesarean incisions. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:633-7.
3. Shah YG, Ronner W, Eckl CJ, Stinson SK. Acute maternal morbidity following classical cesarean delivery of the preterm infant. Obstet Gynecol 1990;76:16-9.
4. O'Grady JP, Gimovsky ML, Bayer-Zwirello LA, Giordano K, eds. Operative Obstetrics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2008.
5. Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom S, et al., eds. Chapter 25. Cesarean Delivery and Peripartum Hysterectomy. In: William's Obstetrics. 23 ed. Stamford, CT: McGraw-Hill Professional; 2009:544-64.
6. Haddad NG, Irvine DS. Classical versus lower segment caesarean section in very pre-term deliveries. Lancet 1988;1:762.
7. Druzin ML, Hutson JM, San Roman G. Uterine incision and maternal morbidity after cesarean section for delivery of the very low birthweight fetus. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1989;169:131-2.
8. Robertson PA, Foran CM, Croughan-Minihane MS, Kilpatrick SJ. Head entrapment and neonatal outcome by mode of delivery in breech deliveries from twenty-four to twenty-seven weeks of gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:1171-6.
9. Bethune M, Permezel M. The relationship between gestational age and the incidence of classical caesarean section. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;37:153-5.
10. Douglas RG, Stromme WB, Zuspan FP, Quilligan EJ. Operative obstetrics. 5th ed. Norwalk, Conn.: Appleton & Lange; 1988.
11. Chauhan SP, Magann EF, Wiggs CD, et al. Pregnancy after classic cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:946-50.
12. Carswell W. The current status of classical Caesarean section. Scott Med J 1973;18:105-8.
13. Halperin ME, Moore DC, Hannah WJ. Classical versus lowsegment transverse incision for preterm caesarean section: maternal complications and outcome of subsequent pregnancies. Brit J Obstet Gynaec 1988;95:990-6.
14. Greene RA, Fitzpatrick C, Turner MJ. What are the maternal implications of a classical caesarean section? J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;18:345-7.
15. Lao TT, Halpern SH, Crosby ET, Huh C. Uterine incision and maternal blood loss in preterm caesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1993;252:113-7.