Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Peritoneal adhesions do not increase intra-operative organ injury or adverse neonatal outcomes during a repeated cesarean delivery

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To examine whether the presence of peritoneal adhesions at the second cesarean delivery (CD), attributable to the first CD, are associated with maternal intra-operative organ injury and adverse neonatal outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted, comparing severe maternal intra-operative organ injury and adverse neonatal outcomes, between women with and without peritoneal adhesions. All women with two CDs during the follow-up period were included. Women with adhesions diagnosed during the first CD, history of other abdominal or pelvic surgery, pelvic infection or pelvic inflammatory disease, endometriosis, uterine Mullerian anomalies and newborns with known chromosomal or structural abnormalities were excluded, resulting in 7925 women. Intra-operative peritoneal organ injury was defined as a composite of bladder injury, ureteral injury, small bowel injury or hysterectomy. The examined adverse neonatal outcomes were low 1 and 5 min Apgar scores, intrapartum death (IPD) and postpartum death (PPD). Multivariate logistic regression was performed.

Results

Peritoneal adhesions at the second CD, attributable to the first CD were diagnosed in 32.6% of patients (n = 2581). The presence of peritoneal adhesions was not found to be independently associated with intra-operative organ injury nor with 5 min Apgar scores, IPD and PPD. Second CDs complicated with adhesions were found to be associated with low (< 7) 1 min Apgar scores (adjusted OR 1.38, CI 1.20–1.58, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Adhesions attributable to a previous CD do not seem to increase the risk for intra-operative organ injury and adverse neonatal outcomes. These findings may assist in reassuring patients who are facing a second CD.

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. MacDorman M, Declercq E, Menacker F (2011) Recent trends and patterns in Cesarean and Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) deliveries in the United States. Clin Perinatol 38:179–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clp.2011.03.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kessous R, Sergienko R, Sheiner E (2020) Tubal ligation during cesarean delivery and future risk for ovarian cancer: a population-based cohort study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 301:1473–1477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05547-w

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in collaboration with the Society of Reproductive Surgeons (2013) Pathogenesis, consequences, and control of peritoneal adhesions in gynecologic surgery: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 99:1550–1555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Sandoval P, Jiménez-Heffernan JA, Guerra-Azcona G et al (2016) Mesothelial-to-mesenchymal transition in the pathogenesis of post-surgical peritoneal adhesions. J Pathol 239:48–59. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.4695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Liakakos T, Thomakos N, Fine PM et al (2001) Peritoneal adhesions: etiology, pathophysiology, and clinical significance-recent advances in prevention and management. Dig Surg 18:260–273

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Diamond MP, Freeman ML (2001) Clinical implications of postsurgical adhesions. Hum Reprod Update 7:567–576. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/7.6.567

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Lower AM, Hawthorn RJ, Ellis H et al (2000) The impact of adhesions on hospital readmissions over ten years after 8849 open gynaecological operations: an assessment from the surgical and clinical adhesions research study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 107:855–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2000.tb11083.x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Morales KJ, Gordon MC, Bates GW Jr (2007) Postcesarean delivery adhesions associated with delayed delivery of infant. Am J Obstet Gynecol 196:461.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.12.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Awonuga AO, Fletcher NM, Saed GM, Diamond MP (2011) Postoperative adhesion development following cesarean and open intra-abdominal gynecological operations: a review. Reprod Sci 18:1166–1185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719111414206

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Hellebrekers BW, Kooistra T (2011) Pathogenesis of postoperative adhesion formation. Br J Surg 98:1503–1516. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7657

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Saed GM, Diamond MP (2004) Molecular characterization of postoperative adhesions: the adhesion phenotype. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 11:307–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1074-3804(05)60041-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vipond MN, Whawell SA, Thompson JN, Dudley HA (1990) Peritoneal fibrinolytic activity and intra-abdominal adhesions. Lancet 335:1120–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(90)91125-T

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Szecsi PB, Jørgensen M, Klajnbard A et al (2010) Haemostatic reference intervals in pregnancy. Thromb Haemost 103:718–727. https://doi.org/10.1160/TH09-10-0704

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tulandi T, Agdi M, Zarei A et al (2009) Adhesion development and morbidity after repeat cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 201:56.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.04.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ellis H, Moran BJ, Thompson JN et al (1999) Adhesion-related hospital readmissions after abdominal and pelvic surgery: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 353:1476–1480. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(98)09337-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Vrijland WW, Jeekel J, Van Geldorp HJ et al (2003) Abdominal adhesions: intestinal obstruction, pain, and infertility. Surg Endosc 17:1017–1022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-002-9208-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ray NF, Denton WG, Thamer M et al (1998) Abdominal adhesiolysis: inpatient care and expenditures in the United States in 1994. J Am Coll Surg 186:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1072-7515(97)00127-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marana R, Catalano GF, Muzii L (2003) Salpingoscopy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 15:333–336. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.gco.0000084245.09900.dd

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. van Goor H (2007) Consequences and complications of peritoneal adhesions. Colorectal Dis 9:25–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-1318.2007.01358.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. ten Broek RP, Strik C, Issa Y et al (2013) Adhesiolysis-related morbidity in abdominal surgery. Ann Surg 258:98–106. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31826f4969

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Davey AK, Maher PJ (2007) Surgical adhesions: a timely update, a great challenge for the future. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 14:15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2006.07.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Walfisch A, Beloosesky R, Shrim A, Hallak M (2014) Adhesion prevention after cesarean delivery: evidence, and lack of it. Am J Obstet Gynecol 211:446–452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2014.05.027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Arlier S, Seyfettinoğlu S, Yilmaz E et al (2017) Incidence of adhesions and maternal and neonatal morbidity after repeat cesarean section. Arch Gynecol Obstet 295:303–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Rossouw JN, Hall D, Harvey J (2013) Time between skin incision and delivery during cesarean. Int J Gynecol Obstet 121:82–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.11.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Soltan MH, Al Nuaima L, Khashoggi T et al (1996) Sequelae of repeat cesarean sections. Int J Gynecol Obstet 52:127–132

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Makoha FW, Felimban HM, Fathuddien MA et al (2004) Multiple cesarean section morbidity. Int J Gynecol Obstet 87:227–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2004.08.016

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Gungorduk K, Asicioglu O, Celikkol O et al (2010) Iatrogenic bladder injuries during caesarean delivery: a case control study. J Obstet Gynaecol 30:667–670. https://doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2010.486086

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sikirica V, Broder MS, Chang E et al (2012) Clinical and economic impact of adhesiolysis during repeat cesarean delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 91:719–725. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0412.2012.01395.x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Juang J, Gabriel RA, Dutton RP et al (2017) Choice of anesthesia for cesarean delivery: an analysis of the national anesthesia clinical outcomes registry. Anesth Analg 124:1914–1917. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000001677

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Olutoye OA, Baker BW, Belfort MA, Olutoye OO (2018) Food and Drug Administration warning on anesthesia and brain development: implications for obstetric and fetal surgery. Am J Obstet Gyneco 218(1):98–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Saban A, Shoham-Vardi I, Yohay D, Weintraub AY (2019) Peritoneal adhesions are an independent risk factor for peri- and post-partum infectious morbidity. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 241:60–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.08.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Abu-Ghanem S, Sheiner E, Sherf M et al (2012) Lack of prenatal care in a traditional community: trends and perinatal outcomes. Arch Gynecol Obstet 285:1237–1242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-011-2153-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was not funded.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Epidemiology and Health Services Evaluation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel

    Alla Saban & Ilana Shoham-Vardi

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Soroka University Medical Center, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel

    David Yohay & Adi Y Weintraub

Authors
  1. Alla Saban
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilana Shoham-Vardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Yohay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adi Y Weintraub
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. AW conceived of the presented idea. AS performed the analytic calculations and wrote the manuscript with input from all authors. ISV verified the analytical methods. All authors helped shape the research and contributed to the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alla Saban.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Ethics statement

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of SUMC institutional review board, # SOR-0146-17.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Saban, A., Shoham-Vardi, I., Yohay, D. et al. Peritoneal adhesions do not increase intra-operative organ injury or adverse neonatal outcomes during a repeated cesarean delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 302, 879–886 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05676-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05676-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation