Maternal Morbidity Associated with Multiple Repeat Cesarean Deliveries

Citation

Silver, Robert M.; Landon, Mark B.; Rouse, Dwight J.; Leveno, Kenneth J.; Spong, Catherine Y.; Thom, Elizabeth A.; Moawad, Atef H.; Caritis, Steve N.; Harper, Margaret A.; & Wapner, Ronald J., et al. (2006). Maternal Morbidity Associated with Multiple Repeat Cesarean Deliveries. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 107(6), 1226-1232.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Although repeat cesarean deliveries often are associated with serious morbidity, they account for only a portion of abdominal deliveries and are overlooked when evaluating morbidity. Our objective was to estimate the magnitude of increased maternal morbidity associated with increasing number of cesarean deliveries.
METHODS: Prospective observational cohort of 30,132 women who had cesarean delivery without labor in 19 academic centers over 4 years (1999–2002).
RESULTS: There were 6,201 first (primary), 15,808 second, 6,324 third, 1,452 fourth, 258 fifth, and 89 sixth or more cesarean deliveries. The risks of placenta accreta, cystotomy, bowel injury, ureteral injury, and ileus, the need for postoperative ventilation, intensive care unit admission, hysterectomy, and blood transfusion requiring 4 or more units, and the duration of operative time and hospital stay significantly increased with increasing number of cesarean deliveries. Placenta accreta was present in 15 (0.24%), 49 (0.31%), 36 (0.57%), 31 (2.13%), 6 (2.33%), and 6 (6.74%) women undergoing their first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth or more cesarean deliveries, respectively. Hysterectomy was required in 40 (0.65%) first, 67 (0.42%) second, 57 (0.90%) third, 35 (2.41%) fourth, 9 (3.49%) fifth, and 8 (8.99%) sixth or more cesarean deliveries. In the 723 women with previa, the risk for placenta accreta was 3%, 11%, 40%, 61%, and 67% for first, second, third, fourth, and fifth or more repeat cesarean deliveries, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Because serious maternal morbidity increases progressively with increasing number of cesarean deliveries, the number of intended pregnancies should be considered during counseling regarding elective repeat cesarean operation versus a trial of labor and when debating the merits of elective primary cesarean delivery.

URL

http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84

Reference Type

Journal Article

Year Published

2006

Journal Title

Obstetrics & Gynecology

Author(s)

Silver, Robert M.
Landon, Mark B.
Rouse, Dwight J.
Leveno, Kenneth J.
Spong, Catherine Y.
Thom, Elizabeth A.
Moawad, Atef H.
Caritis, Steve N.
Harper, Margaret A.
Wapner, Ronald J.
Sorokin, Yoram
Miodovnik, Menachem
Carpenter, Marshall W.
Peaceman, Alan M.
O'Sullivan, Mary Jo
Sibai, Baha M.
Langer, Oded
Thorp, John M., Jr.
Ramin, Susan M.
Mercer, Brian M., for the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network

ORCiD

Thorp - 0000-0002-9307-6690