Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation versus caesarean delivery in the first stage of labour: comparison of maternal and perinatal morbidity

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To compare perinatal and maternal morbidity associated with caesarean sections performed in the first with that performed in the second stages of labour.

Patients and methods

Comparative analyses between nulliparous women with singleton term pregnancies who had a caesarean section in the first stage of labour and those who had a second stage caesarean section were completed using standard statistical methods. A subgroup analysis, according to indication for caesarean section, was also performed.

Results

Of 627 women, 81% had caesarean delivery in the first stage and 19% had caesarean delivery in the second stage of labour. Women undergoing caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation were 1.9 times more likely to have an augmented labour (95% CI 1.2–3.4, P < 0.001) and 2.8 times more likely to have epidural anaesthesia in labour (95% CI 1.5–5.2, P < 0.001) than those in the first stage. Compared with caesarean delivery in the first stage of labour, women undergoing caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation were 4.6 times more likely to have composite intraoperative complications (95% CI 2.7–7.9, P < 0.001), 3.1 times more likely to have blood loss greater than 1,000 ml (95% CI 1.3–7.4, P = 0.01), and 2.9 times more likely to have a blood transfusion (95% CI 1.5–5.6, P < 0.001). The risk of neonatal morbidity was higher in first stage caesareans when they were performed for presumed fetal compromise (66.3 vs. 26.3%, P = 0.002), and lower when they were performed for failure to progress (18.4 vs. 42%, P = 0.02).

Conclusion

Caesarean section in the second stage of labour is associated with a higher risk of maternal but not perinatal morbidity.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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. Joseph KS, Young DC, Dodds L (2003) Changes in maternal characteristics and obstetric practice and recent increase in primary caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 102:791–800

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lauer JA, Betrán AP (2007) Decision aid for women with previous caesarean section. BMJ 334:1281–1282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Betrán AP, Myriad M, Lauer JA, Bin-shun W, Thomas J, Van Look P (2007) Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 28:98–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dabbas M, Al-Sumadi A (2007) Caesarean section rate: much room for reduction. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 34(3):146–148

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lowe B (1987) Fear of failure: a place for trial of instrumental delivery. BJOG 94:60–66

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Revah A, Ezra Y, Farine D, Ritchie K (1997) Failed trial of vacuum or forceps—maternal and fetal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 176:200–204

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Venity L, Swingler R, Patel R (2001) Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in the second stage of labour: a cohort study. Lancet 358:1203–1207

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Patel R, Venity L, Swingler R (2003) Cohort study of operative delivery in the second stage of labour and standard obstetric acre. BJOG 110:610–615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Burrows LJ, Meyn LA, Weber AM (2004) Maternal morbidity associated with vaginal versus caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 103(5 Pt 1):907–912

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Liebling RE, Swingler R, Patel RR, Verity L, Soothill PW, Murphy DJ (2004) Pelvic floor morbidity up to one year after difficult instrumental delivery and caesarean section in the second stage of labour: a cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:200–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Liu S, Heaman M, Joseph KS, Liston RM, Huang L, Sauve R, Kramer MS (2005) Risk of maternal postpartum readmission associated with mode of delivery. Obstet Gynecol 105(4):836–842

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Baskett TF (2006) Maternal morbidity associated with caesarean delivery without labour compared with induction of labour at term. Obstet Gynecol 108(2):286–294

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS, Maternal Health Study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System (2007) Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned caesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ 176(4):455–460

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Office of National Statistics. Caesarean deliveries in NHS hospitals: Social Trends 34. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=7412&More=Y

  15. Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Baskett TF (2003) Maternal morbidity associated with caesarean delivery without labour compared with spontaneous onset of labour at term. Obstet Gynecol 102:477–482

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Allen V, O’Connell C, Baskett T (2005) Maternal and perinatal morbidity of caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation compared with caesarean delivery in the first stage of labour. BJOG 112:986–990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cebekulu L, Buchmann EJ (2006) Complications associated with caesarean section in the second stage of labour. Int J Gynecol Obstet 95:110–114

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Alexander JM, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, Landon MB, Gilbert S, Spong CY, Varner MW, Moawad AH, Caritis SN, Harper M, Wapner R, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, O’Sullivan MJ, Sibai BM, Langer O, Gabbe SG (2007) Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes from primary caesarean delivery during the second compared with first stage of labour. Obstet Gynecol 109(4):917–921

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lewis G (2004) Why mothers dies 2000–2002: confidential enquiries into maternal and child health. RCOG Press, London pp 37–40

    Google Scholar 

  20. Janni W, Schiessl B, Peschers U, Huber S, Strobl B, Hantschmann P, Uhlmann N, Dimpfl T, Rammel G, Kainer F (2002) The prognostic impact of a prolonged second stage of labour on maternal and fetal Outcome. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 81(3):214–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2007) Intrapartum care, London

Download references

Acknowledgments

The following assisted in some data collection: Dr. Rhonda Fleming and Dr. Ora Jesna.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Women and Children’s Directorate, Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust, Chase Farm Hospital, The Ridgeway, Enfield, EN2 8JL, UK

    Dan Selo-Ojeme, Sathevan Sathiyathasan & Mustabshera Fayyaz

Authors
  1. Dan Selo-Ojeme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sathevan Sathiyathasan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mustabshera Fayyaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Selo-Ojeme.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Selo-Ojeme, D., Sathiyathasan, S. & Fayyaz, M. Caesarean delivery at full cervical dilatation versus caesarean delivery in the first stage of labour: comparison of maternal and perinatal morbidity. Arch Gynecol Obstet 278, 245–249 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-007-0548-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-007-0548-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation