Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Influence of the mode of delivery on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a comparison between elective cesarean section and planned vaginal delivery in a low-risk obstetric population

  • Materno-fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The aim of the study was to compare the maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with elective cesarean sections with planned vaginal delivery.

Methods

A total of 178 women with elective cesarean section were compared with the next parity- and age-matched women presenting in spontaneous labor. Our analysis was restricted to a sample of low-risk obstetrical women. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were the main outcome variables of interest. Maternal morbidity outcome variables included wound infection, trauma, puerperal febrile morbidity and significant blood loss (>500 ml). Neonatal outcomes were captured by Apgar scores, cord pH as well as the occurrence of neonatal infections.

Results

A significantly higher rate of puerperal febrile morbidity (n = 46 vs. 14, p = 0.0001) and wound infections (n = 16 vs. 2, p = 0.0001) could be detected in the elective cesarean section group. Additionally, a significant blood loss > 500 ml was more than twice as frequent in the cesarean section group (n = 22 vs. 10, p = 0.03) with non-significant lower postpartum hemoglobin levels being observed (10.4 vs. 11.2 g/dL, p > 0.05). A significant increase for the use of iron supplementation (n = 146 vs. 122, p = 0.002), analgesics (n = 168 vs. 60, p = 0.0001) and antibiotics (n = 48 vs. 18, p = 0.0001) could be found in the puerperal period and hospital admission was prolonged in elective cesarean section (6.8 vs. 3.5 days, p = 0.0001). Additionally, problems in breastfeeding occurred more frequently in this group (n = 18 vs. 4, p = 0.002). Neonatal complications were generally low in both the groups with no significant differences being observed (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

The increased maternal morbidity in elective cesarean section included puerperal febrile morbidity, wound infections as well as breastfeeding problems in the postpartum period. Women should be sufficiently counseled regarding the increased risk of these complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Placek PJ, Taffel SM (1984) Cesarean section delivery rates: United States 1982. Am J Public Health 73:861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. National Institutes of Health (1981) Cesarean childbirth NIH publication No. 82–2067. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  3. Albers L, Garcia J, Renfrew M, McCandlish R, Elbourne D (1999) Distribution of genital tract trauma in childbirth and related postnatal pain. Birth 26:11–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Haadem K, Ohrlander S, Lingman G (1988) Long-term ailments due to anal sphincter rupture caused by delivery—a hidden problem. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 27:27–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Haadem K, Dahlstrom JA, Ling L, Ohrlander S (1987) Anal sphincter function after delivery rupture. Obstet Gynecol 70:53–56

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Al Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk MN (1996) Obstetricians’ personal choice and mode of delivery. Lancet 347:544

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Husslein P (2001) Elective cesarean section versus vaginal delivery. Whither the end of traditional obstetrics? Arch Gynecol Obstet 265(4):169–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Allen VM, O`Connell CM, Liston RM, Baskett TF (2003) Maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery without labor compared with spontaneous onset of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol 102:477–482

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wax JR (2006) Maternal request cesarean versus planned spontaneous vaginal delivery: maternal morbidity and short term outcomes. Semin Perinatol 30:247–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Blindness, Perinatal Research Branch (1966) The collaborative study on cerebral palsy, mental retardation and other neurological and sensory disorders of infancy and childhood. Part III: manuals. Bethesda

  11. Bewley S, Cockburn J (2002) The unethics of “request” cesarean section. BJOG 109:593–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bewley S, Cockburn J (2002) The unfacts of “request” cesarean section. BJOG 109:597–605

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wax JR, Cartin A, Pinette MG, Blackstone J (2004) Patient choice cesarean: An evidence-based review. Obstet Gynecol Survey 59(8):601–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Penna L, Arulkumaran S (2003) Cesarean section for non-medical reasons. Int J Gynecol Obstet 82:399–409

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Mc Farlin B (2004) Elective cesarean birth: issues and ethics of an informed decision. J Midwifery Womens Health 49(5):421–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Van Ham MA, van Dongen PW, Mulder J (1997) Maternal consequences of cesarean section. A retrospective study of intraoperative and postoperative maternal complications of cesarean section over a 10 year period. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 74:1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Declercq E, Barger M, Cabral HJ, Evans SR, Kotelchuck M, Simon C, Weiss J, Heffner LJ (2007) Maternal outcomes associated with planned primary cesarean births compared with planned vaginal births. Obstet Gynecol 109(3):669–677

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS (2007) Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ 176(4):455–460

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Morisson J, Mac Kenzie IZ (2003) Cesarean section on demand. Semin Perinatol 27(1):20–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Irion O, Hirsbrunner Almagbaly P, Morabia A (1988) Planned vaginal delivery versus elective cesarean section: a study of 705 singleton term breech presentations. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 105:710–717

    Google Scholar 

  21. Audit Comimission (1997) First class delivery: improving maternity services in England and Wales. Audit commissions Publications, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  22. Henderson J, Mc Candlish R, Kumiega L, Petrou S (2001) Systematic review of economic aspects of alternative modes of delivery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 108:149–157

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Mazur J, Mikiel-Kostyra K (2000) Determinanats of newborn feeding in materity hospital care. Part II: factors associated with exclusive breast feeding. Ginekol Pol 71:604–611

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Levine EM, Ghai V, Barton JJ et al (2001) Mode of delivery and risk of respiratory diseases in newborns. Obstet Gynecol 97:439–442

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Zanardo V, Simbi AK, Franzoi M, Solda G, Salvadori A, Trevisanuto D (2004) Neonatal respiratory morbidity risk and mode of delivery at term: influence of timing of elective cesarean delivery. Acta Paediatr 93(5):643–647

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Hansen AK, Wisborg K, Uldbjerg N, Henriksen TB (2008) Risk of respiratory morbidity in term infants delivered by elective cesarean section: cohort study. BMJ 336(7635):85–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Klaus Bodner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bodner, K., Wierrani, F., Grünberger, W. et al. Influence of the mode of delivery on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a comparison between elective cesarean section and planned vaginal delivery in a low-risk obstetric population. Arch Gynecol Obstet 283, 1193–1198 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1525-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1525-y

Keywords

Navigation