Title: To Compare the Risk of Maternal and Perinatal Morbidity and Mortality in Second Gravida Women
Authors: Dr. Anjum Ara, Dr. Suman Budania
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i1.12
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare obstetrical outcomes after cesarean versus vaginal delivery in second gravida women.
MATERIAL & METHODS: We restricted our study to women of parity one with single previous cesarean or single vaginal delivery, as multiple previous cesarean or previous successful vaginal delivery are known to influence the mode of delivery. For comparative analysis, the study population was divided into two groups according to mode of delivery for first birth. Group I ,Pregnant women with cesarean first birth (n=100).Group II, Pregnant women with vaginal first birth (n=100).
RESULTS: In our study the distribution of cases according to age was comparable in both the groups and there was no statistical significant difference (p value >0.638). The difference which was statistically significant was incidence of placental abnormalities only (p=0.04).
CONCLUSION: To conclude the discussion about obstetric outcomes we observed increased risk of maternal complications and repeat cesarean section following previous cesarean section. About perinatal morbidity and mortality we observed in our study no significant difference in both the groups regarding perinatal outcome.
KEYWORDS: Cesarean deliverey, Vaginal delivery, Gravida, Prenatal.
References
1. 1. Chanrachakul B, Herabutya Y, Udomsubpayakul U. Epidemic of cesarean section at the general, private and university hospitals in Thailand. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2000; 26: 357-361.
2. Laws PJ, Sullivan EA. Australia’s mothers and babies 2002. Perinatal Statistics Series No. 15. Sydney: National Perinatal Statistics Unit, 2004. (AIHW Catalogue No: PER 28).
3. Cunningham F, Leveno K, Bloom S, Hauth J, Rouse D, Spong CY. Cesarean delivery and peripartum hysterectomy. In : Williams Obstetrics, 23rd edition 2011; p-544-564.
4. Gossman GL, Joesch JM, Tanfer K. Trends in maternal request cesarean delivery from 1991 to 2004. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108: 1506.
5. Menacker F, Declercq E, Macdorman MF. Cesarean delivery: background, trends, and epidemiology. Semin Perinatol 2006; 30(5):235.
6. Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, et al. Maternal and neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with cesarean delivery: multicenter prospective study. BJM 2007; 335:1025.
7. Hawkins JL, Chang J, Palmer SK, et al. Anesthesia-related maternal mortality in the United States: 1979–2002. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117(1):69.
8. Cheesman K, Brady JE, Flood P, et al. Epidemiology of anesthesia-related complications in labor and delivery, New York State, 2002– 2005. Anesth Analg 2009; 109:1174.
9. Güngördük K, Asicioglu O, Celikkol O, et al. Iatrogenic bladder injuries during cesarean delivery: a case control study. J Obstet Gynaecol 2010; 30(7):667.
10. Phipps MG, Watabe B, Clemons JL, et al. Risk factors for bladder injury during cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105(1):156.
11. Rajasekar D, Hall M. Urinary tract injuries during obstetric intervention. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104:731.
12. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107:1226.
13. Wanjari SA. Rising cesarean section rate: a matter of concern? Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 3(3):728-731.
14. Taylor LK, Simpson JM, Roberts CL, Olive EC, Henderson-Smart DJ. Risk of complications in a second pregnancy following cesarean section in the first pregnancy: a population-based study. MJA 2005; 183: 515–519.
15. Kennare R, Tucker G, Heard A, Chan A. Risks of adverse outcomes in the next birth after a first cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109(2 Pt 1):270-6.