There is Only a Modest Increase in Neonatal Respiratory Morbidity Following Early Term Elective Cesarean in a South Indian Population

  • Nagaraja Katwa
  • Akhila Vasudeva
  • Leslie E. S. Lewis
  • Pratap Kumar
Original Article

Abstract

Objectives

Elective cesarean deliveries (ECD) are still performed prior to 39 weeks. This study aimed to identify risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity (NRM) following ECD near term, in a South Indian population. Specifically, study aimed to measure the additional healthcare burden due to large number of ECDs performed prior to 39 weeks, in this local population.

Methods

We analyzed NRM among 1329 deliveries (584 ECD and 745 spontaneous vaginal delivery, SVD) in a tertiary hospital over 2 years. Neonates were grouped into: A: 35+0–36+6 weeks, B: 37+0–38+6 weeks, and C: ≥39 weeks. NRM was compared between ECD versus SVD.

Results

Majority (433/584) of ECDs were performed between 37+0 and 38+6 weeks. Overall, 32% received steroid prophylaxis. Of 1329 newborns, 18/584 (3.82%) in ECD and 6/745 (0.8%) in SVD group developed NRM (p value of 0.004, OR 3.9, CI 1.54–9.93). Need of respiratory support among ECD was 4.28% compared to 0.53% in SVD (p < 0.001, OR 8.28; CI 2.86–23.94). However, comparing neonates born by ECD between groups B Vs C; there was only a modest increase in NRM (2.07 vs 0.9%; p 0.48, OR 2.3 with CI 0.29–18.4) and in need of respiratory support (2.54 vs 0.9%; p 0.47, OR 2.84; CI 0.36–22.2).

Conclusion

NRM following early term ECD continues to be a healthcare burden in India. Interestingly in this South Indian population, early term ECDs caused only modest increase in NRM, and this ethnic variation requires further evaluation to determine ideal time for ECD in local population.

Keywords

Neonatal respiratory morbidity Transient tachypnoea of newborn Respiratory distress syndrome Persistent pulmonary hypertension Elective cesarean at term Elective cesarean near term 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors have filled in the conflicts of interest form. All 4 authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Statements

Work described has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication anywhere else; that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities—tacitly or explicitly—at the institute where the work has been carried out. The publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.

Ethical Approval

Ethical consent for the work has been given by the institutional ethical committee. This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, et al. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990–2014. PLoS ONE. 2016;11(2):1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Parikh L, Singh J, Timofeev J, et al. Timing and consequences of early term and late term deliveries. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(11):1158–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee opinion no. 559: cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121:904–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Caesarean section. National collaborating centre for women’s and children’s health. Commissioned by the national institute of health and clinical excellence. Clinical guideline 132. 2nd ed. Regent’s Park, London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2011. p. 1–105.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ertugrul S, Gun I, Mungen E, et al. Evaluation of neonatal outcomes in elective repeat cesarean delivery at term according to weeks of gestation. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2013;39(1):105–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berthelot-Ricou A, Lacroze V, Courbiere B, et al. Respiratory distress syndrome after elective caesarean section in near term infants: a 5-year cohort study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26(2):176–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tzur T, Weintraub AY, Sheiner E, et al. Timing of elective repeat caesarean section: maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24(1):58–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vidic Z, Blickstein I, Štucin Gantar I, et al. Timing of elective cesarean section and neonatal morbidity: a population-based study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(15):2460–2.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Badran EF, Abdalgani MM, Al-Lawama MA, et al. Effects of perinatal risk factors on common neonatal respiratory morbidities beyond 36 weeks of gestation. Saudi Med J. 2012;33(12):1317–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wankaew N, Jirapradittha J, Kiatchoosakun P. Neonatal morbidity and mortality for repeated cesarean section vs. normal vaginal delivery to uncomplicated term pregnancies at Srinagarind Hospital. J Med Assoc Thai. 2013;96(6):654–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shetty SK, Shetty AK. Association of neonatal respiratory morbidity with timing of elective cesarean delivery. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4(2):461–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Swarnkar K, Swarnkar M. Neonatal respiratory distress in early neonatal period and its outcome. Int J Biomed Adv Res. 2015;6(09):643–7.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Daniel S, Viswanathan M, Simi BN, et al. Comparison of fetal outcomes of emergency and elective cesarean sections in a teaching hospital in Kerala. Acad Med J India. 2014;2(1):32–6.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hutcheon JA, Strumpf EC, Harper S, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after implementation of a hospital policy to limit low-risk planned caesarean deliveries before 39 weeks of gestation: an interrupted time-series analysis. BJOG. 2015;122(9):1200–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Doan E, Gibbons K, Tudehope D. The timing of elective caesarean deliveries and early neonatal outcomes in singleton infants born 37–41 weeks’ gestation. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;54(4):340–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hourani M, Ziade F, Rajab M. Timing of planned caesarean section and the morbidities of the newborn. N Am J Med Sci. 2011;3(10):465–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Glavind J, Kindberg SF, Uldbjerg N, et al. Elective caesarean section at 38 weeks versus 39 weeks: neonatal and maternal outcomes in a randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2013;120(9):1123–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nagaraja Katwa
    • 1
  • Akhila Vasudeva
    • 1
  • Leslie E. S. Lewis
    • 2
  • Pratap Kumar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical CollegeManipal UniversityManipal, Udupi DistrictIndia
  2. 2.Department of Neonatology, Kasturba Medical CollegeManipal UniversityManipal, Udupi DistrictIndia

Personalised recommendations