Does a Caesarean section increase the time to a second live birth? A register-based cohort study

Human Reproduction

Volumn 29, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 2560-2568

  O'Neill, Sinéad M ^a   Khashan, Ali S ^b,c   Henriksen, Tine B ^d   Kenny, Louise C ^b,c   Kearney, Patricia M ^c   Mortensen, Preben B ^e   Greene, Richard A ^a   Agerbo, Esben ^e  

^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)

^e AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

birth cohort; Caesarean delivery; live birth rate; mode of delivery; time to next birth

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH RATE; BODY MASS; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENMARK; DISEASE REGISTRY; ECTOPIC PREGNANCY; ELECTIVE SURGERY; EMERGENCY SURGERY; EPIDEMIOLOGICAL DATA; FEMALE; FEMALE FERTILITY; HAZARD RATIO; HUMAN; LIVE BIRTH; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL CARE; MATERNAL MORTALITY; PREGNANT WOMAN; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; SMOKING; SPONTANEOUS ABORTION; STILLBIRTH; VAGINAL DELIVERY; DELIVERY; PREGNANCY; REGISTER; TIME TO PREGNANCY;

ADULT; BIRTH RATE; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT STUDIES; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIVE BIRTH; PREGNANCY; REGISTRIES; TIME-TO-PREGNANCY;

EID: 84913530220     PISSN: 02681161     EISSN: 14602350     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deu217     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Albrechtsen S, Rasmussen S, DalakerK, Irgens LM. Reproductive career after breech presentation: subsequent pregnancy rates, interpregnancy interval, and recurrence. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92:345-350.
2. Andersen AN, Erb K. Register data on assisted reproductive technology (ART) in Europe including a detailed description of ART in Denmark. Int J Androl 2006;29:12-16.
3. Andersen AN,Westergaard HB, Olsen J. The Danish in vitro fertilisation (IVF) register. Dan Med Bull 1999;46:357-360.
4. 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;328:311-314.
5. Barrett JF, HannahME,Hutton EK,Willan AR,AllenAC,Armson BA, Gafni A, Joseph K, Mason D,Ohlsson A. A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1295-1305.
6. Dahlen HG, Tracy S, Tracy M, Bisits A, Brown C, Thornton C. Rates of obstetric intervention among low-risk women giving birth in private and public hospitals in NSW: a population-based descriptive study. BMJ Open 2012;2: e001723. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001723.
7. Dahlgren LS, Von Dadelszen P, Christilaw J, Janssen PA, Lisonkova S, Marquette GP, Liston RM. Caesarean section on maternal request: risks and benefits in healthy nulliparous women and their infants. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2009;31:808-817.
8. DNBH. Danish National Board of Health (online). Copenhagen, 2013. http://www.sst.dk (7 March 2013, date last accessed).
9. Fu JC, Xirasagar S, Liu J, Probst JC. Cesarean and VBAC rates among immigrant vs. native-born women: a retrospective observational study from Taiwan Cesarean delivery and VBAC among immigrant women in Taiwan. BMC Public Health 2010;10:548.
10. Glavind J, Henriksen TB, Kindberg SF, Uldbjerg N. Randomised trial of planned Caesarean section prior to versus after 39 weeks: unscheduled deliveries and facility logistics - a secondary analysis. PLoS One 2013; 8:e84744.
11. 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;28:1943-1952.
12. Helweg-Larsen K. The Danish Register of Causes of Death. Scand J Public Health 2011;39:26-29.
13. Hemminki E. Impact of caesarean section on future pregnancy - a review of cohort studies. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1996;10:366-379.
14. Kjerulff KH, Velott DL, Zhu J, Chuang CH, Hillemeier MM, Paul IM, Repke JT. Modeof first deliveryand women's intentions for subsequent childbearing: findings from the First Baby Study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2013; 27:62-71.
15. Knudsen LB, Olsen J. The Danish Medical Birth Registry. Dan Med Bull 1999; 45:320-323.
16. Kristensen J, Langhoff-Roos J, Skovgaard LT, Kristensen FB. Validation of the Danish Birth Registration. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:893-897.
17. Lavender T, Hofmeyr GJ, Neilson James P, Kingdon C, Gyte Gillian ML. 2012. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (online). http://0-onlinelibrary.wiley.com.library.ucc.ie/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD004660.pub3/abstract.
18. Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M. The Danish National Patient Register. Scand J Public Health 2011;39:30-33.
19. Macdorman MF, Declercq E, Mathews T, Stotland N. Trends and characteristics of home vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in the United States and selected states. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:737-744.
20. Maheshwari A, Bhattacharya S, Johnson NP. Predicting fertility. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2008;11:109-117.
21. Miettinen OS. Theoretical Epidemiology: Principles of Occurrence Research in Medicine. New York:Wiley, 1985.
22. Minkoff H. Fear of litigation and cesarean section rates. Semin Perinatol 2012; 36:390-394.
23. Murphy DJ, Liebling RE. Cohort study of maternal views on future mode of delivery after operative delivery in the second stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:542-548.
24. Murphy D, Stirrat G, Heron J. The relationship between Caesarean section and subfertility in a population-based sample of 14 541 pregnancies. Hum Reprod 2002;17:1914-1917.
25. OECD. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Health at a Glance 2013: OECD Indicators (online). The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/health-glance-2013-en.
26. O'neill SM, Kearney PM, Kenny LC, Henriksen TB, Lutomski JE, Greene RA, Khashan AS. Caesarean delivery and subsequent pregnancy interval: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2013; 13:165.
27. Oral E, Elter K. The impact of cesarean birth on subsequent fertility. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2007;19:238-243.
28. Pedersen CB. The Danish Civil Registration System. Scand J Public Health 2011;39:22-25.
29. Pedersen CB, Gotzsche H, Moller JO, Mortensen PB. The Danish Civil Registration System. A cohort of eight million persons. Dan Med Bull 2006;53:441-449.
30. Porter M, Bhattacharya S, van Teijlingen E, Templeton A. Does Caesarean section cause infertility? Hum Reprod 2003;18:1983-1986.
31. 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: e001725. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001725.
32. Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL. Modern Epidemiology. Wolters Kluwer Health, 2008.
33. Smith GC,Wood AM, Pell JP, Dobbie R. First cesarean birth and subsequent fertility. Fertil Steril 2006;85:90-95.
34. Stavrou EP, Ford JB, Shand AW, Morris JM, Roberts CL. Epidemiology and trends for Caesarean section births in New South Wales, Australia: a population-based study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2011;11:8. doi:10.1186/1471-2393-11-8.
35. Tollanes MC, Melve KK, Irgens LM, Skjaerven R. Reduced fertility after cesarean delivery: a maternal choice. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110:1256-1263.
36. Vach W, Blettner M. Biased estimation of the odds ratio in case-control studies due to the use of ad hoc methods of correcting for missing values for confounding variables. Am J Epidemiol 1991;134:895-907.
37. Victora CG, Aquino EM, Do Carmo Leal M, Monteiro CA, Barros FC, Szwarcwald CL. Maternal and child health in Brazil: progress and challenges. Lancet 2011;377:1863-1876.