Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

, Volume 285, Issue 4, pp 937–941 | Cite as

Increased rate of cesarean section in primiparous women aged 40 years or more: a single-center study in Japan

  • Hironori Takahashi
  • Noriyoshi Watanabe
  • Rika Sugibayashi
  • Hiroaki Aoki
  • Makiko Egawa
  • Aiko Sasaki
  • Yuki Tsukahara
  • Takahiko Kubo
  • Haruhiko Sago
Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate perinatal outcomes in late primiparous women aged 35–39 and ≥40 years. Our main research question: “Was the rate of cesarean section similar between these 2 groups of advanced maternal age?”

Methods

Primiparous women aged ≥35 years, who delivered in our center between April 2004 and March 2007, were enrolled in this study. They were divided into two groups: women aged 35–39 years and those aged ≥40 years. Antenatal complications, deliveries, and neonatal outcomes were analyzed. Fetal abnormalities, abortions, and multiple gestations were excluded.

Results

We assessed 752 cases (35–39 years, 610 cases; ≥40 years, 142 cases). Incidence of cesarean section (CS) was significantly higher in pregnant women aged ≥40 years (P < 0.01). The CS rate amounted to 50.0% of all deliveries in this age group. Among patients with labor deliveries, the CS rate was also significantly higher in the older age group (P < 0.05). With regard to indication for CS with labor deliveries, the rate of non-progressive labor/dystocia was 19.4% in primiparous women aged ≥40 years and 11.0% in those aged 35–39 years, respectively (P < 0.05). In contrast, the rates of antenatal complications were not different between the two groups, except for gestational diabetes or leiomyoma. No significant differences between the two groups could be found for neonatal outcomes such as birth weight, Apgar score, and admission to neonatal intensive care unit.

Conclusions

CS rate was 50.0% in primiparous women aged ≥40 years. In addition, CS caused by dystocia was almost twice as frequent in primiparous women aged ≥40 years as in women aged 35–39 years. Among late pregnancies, primiparous women aged 40 years and older had higher risk of CS.

Keywords

Advanced maternal age Cesarean section Dystocia Perinatal outcome 

References

  1. 1.
    National Statistics Center (2009) Special report of vital statistics. Tokyo, Japan. http://www.e-stat.go.jp/SG1/estat/eStatTopPortal.do
  2. 2.
    Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Munson ML (2006) Birth: final data for 2004. National Vital Statistics Reports 55. National Center for Health Statistics, HyattsvilleGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Montan S (2007) Increased risk in the elderly parturient. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 19:110–112. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e3280825603 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cleary-Goldman J, Malone FD, Vidaver J, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH et al (2005) Impact of maternal age on obstetric outcome. Obstet Gynecol 105:983–990. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000158118.75532.51 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ecker JL, Chen KT, Cohen AP, Riley LE, Lieberman ES (2001) Increased risk of cesarean delivery with advancing maternal age: indications and associated factors in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:883–887PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ziadeh SM (2002) Maternal and perinatal outcome in nulliparous woman aged 35 and older. Gynecol Obstet Invest 54:6–10. doi:10.1067/mob.2001.117364 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berkowitz GS, Skovron ML, Lapinski RH, Berkowitz RL (1990) Delayed childbearing and the outcome of pregnancy. N Engl J Med 322:659–664. doi:10.1056/NEJM199003083221004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bahtivar MO, Funai EF, Rosenberg V, Norwitz E, Lipkind H, Buhimschi C, Copel JA (2008) Stillbirth at term in women of advanced maternal age in the United States: when could the antenatal testing be initiated? Am J Perinatol 25:301–304. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1076605 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miller DA (2005) Is advanced maternal age an independent factor for uteroplacental insufficiency? Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:1974–1982. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2005.02.050 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aldous M, Edmonson M (1993) Maternal age at first childbirth and risk of low birth weight and preterm delivery in Washington State. JAMA 270:2574–2577. doi:10.1001/jama.1993.03510210060028 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gilbert WM, Nesbitt TS, Danielsen B (1999) Childbearing beyond age 40: pregnancy outcome in 24,032 cases. Obstet Gynecol 93:9–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luke B, Brown MB (2007) Elevated risks of pregnancy complications and adverse outcomes with increasing maternal age. Hum Reprod 22:1264–1272. doi:10.1093/humrep/del522 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ziadeh S, Yahaya A (2001) Pregnancy outcome at age 40 and older. Arch Gynecol Obstet 265:30–33. doi:10.1007/s004040000122 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Callaway LK, Lust K, McIntyre HD (2005) Pregnancy outcomes in women of very advanced maternal age. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 45:12–16. doi:10.1111/j.1479-828X.2005.00333.x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chan BC, Lao TT (2008) Effect of parity and advanced maternal age on obstetric outcome. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 102:237–241. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.05.004 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ezra Y, McParland P, Farine D (1995) High delivery intervention rates in nulliparous women over age 35. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 62:203–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bianco A, Stone J, Lynch L, Lapinski R, Berkowitz G, Berkowitz RL (1996) Pregnancy outcome at age 40 and older. Obstet Gynecol 87:917–922. doi:10.1007/s004040000122 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wei SQ, Luo ZC, Qi HP, Xu H, Fraser WD (2009) High-dose vs low-dose oxytocin for labor augmentation: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203:296–304. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.03.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jacobsson B, Ladfors L, Milsom I (2004) Advanced maternal age and adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol 104:727–733. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000140682.63746.be PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Joseph KS, Allen AC, Dodds L, Turner LA, Scott H, Liston R (2005) The perinatal effects of delayed childbearing. Obstet Gynecol 105:1410–1418. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000163256.83313.36 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hironori Takahashi
    • 1
  • Noriyoshi Watanabe
    • 1
  • Rika Sugibayashi
    • 1
  • Hiroaki Aoki
    • 1
  • Makiko Egawa
    • 1
  • Aiko Sasaki
    • 1
  • Yuki Tsukahara
    • 1
  • Takahiko Kubo
    • 1
  • Haruhiko Sago
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal MedicineNational Center for Child Health and DevelopmentTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations