A cross sectional study of 1000 lower segment cesarean section in obstetrics and gynecology department of P. D. U Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat, India


  • Dolly Chavda Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, P.D.U. Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat, India
  • Kamal Goswam Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, P.D.U. Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat, India
  • Kavita Dudhrejiya Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, P.D.U. Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat, India




Abdominal route delivery, Caesarean section, Lower segment caesarean section


Background: Though WHO recommends a rate of 10-15% caesarean section for a given hospital, there has been a rising trend worldwide. We estimated the recent incidence of caesarean section in Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, P.D.U. Medical College, Rajkot (Gujarat and correlated these rates with the socioeconomic, demographic, and health variables.

Methods: We have studied 1000 cases of lower segment caesarean section (cross sectional study) at Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, P.D.U Medical College, Rajkot (Gujarat) to find out rate of caesarean section, common maternal and fetal indication and complications of lower segment caesarean section.

Results: Caesarean section rate of the present study is 19.9%. Most common indication of LSCS was scarred uterus 39.9%.followed by fetal distress 19.1%, malpresentation 18.6%, and failed induction 7.3%. Maternal morbidities and mortalities in emergency LSCS in compare to elective LSCS. Analysis based on Robson’s ten-group showed that group 5 (Previous CS, single cephalic,>37 weeks) made the greatest contribution to total CS rate.

Conclusions: Scientific advances, social and cultural changes, and medico legal considerations seem to be the main reasons for the increased acceptability of caesarean sections. The decision to perform a C-section delivery must be chosen carefully and should not be profit oriented. There is a possibility of keeping the rate to minimum by reducing number of primary caesarean sections, by proper counseling of the patients, proper monitoring and patience.


Young JH. Caesarean Section: the history and development of the operation from earliest times. London, HK Lewis and Co Ltd, 1944.

Gabert HA, Bey M. History and development of caesarean operation. Obstet Gynaecol Clinic North Am. 1988;5:591-605.

National Library of Medicine. Caesarean Section – a brief history. 1993. Available from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/cesarean/cesarean_ 2.html to …/cesearean_6.html. Accessed 2004.

Rosen MG, Alper MH, Cefalo RC, Bloomfield R, Field T, Guillemin J et al. Consensus Development Conference on Caesarean Childbirth. Cesarean Childbirth. NIH Consens Statement Online 1980;3(6):1-30.

Boley JP. The History of Caesarean Section. CMAJ 1991;145(4):319-22.

National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Caesarean Section-NICE clinical guideline 132. 2nd edition. RCOG Press; 2011.

Emma L, Lisbet L, Kathleen B, Christian M, Edmund F, Jessica L. Contributing indications to the rising caesarean delivery rate. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(1):29-38.

Unnikrishnan B, Rakshith P, Aishwarya A, Nithin K, Rekha T, Prasanna P et al. Indications for Caesarean Section in a tertiary care Obstetric Hospital in Coastal South India. AMJ. 2010;3(12):821-5.

Wang CP, Tan WC, Kanagalingam D, Tan HK. Why we do cesears: a comparison of trends in caesarean section delivery over a decade. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2013;42(8):408-12.

Guise JM, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA. Vaginal birth after caesarean: new insights. Evidence Report/ Tech Assess J. 2010;191:1-397.

Eastman N. Multiparity and its effect on maternal and perinatal mortality. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1988;13(5):833-7.

Parrish KM, Holt VL, Earterling TR, Connell FA, Logerfero JP. Effect of changes in maternal age, parity and birth weight distribution on primary caesarean delivery rates. J Am Medic Assoc. 1994;271(3):443-7.

Bhasin SK, Rajoura OP, Sharma AK, Metha M, Gupta N, Kumar S et al. A high prevalence of caesarean section rate in East Delhi. Indian J Comm Med. 2007;32(3):222-4.

Padmaleela K, Thomas V, Prasad KV. An analysis of the institutional deliveries and their outcomes in government teaching hospitals of Andhra Pradesh, India. IJHSR. 2013;3(5):76-81.

Kambo I, Bedi N, Dhillon BS, Saxena NC. A critical appraisal of caesarean section rates at teaching hospitals in India. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002;79(2)151-8.






Original Research Articles