Emergency and elective caesarean sections: comparison of maternal and fetal outcomes in a suburban tertiary care hospital in Puducherry

Valsa Diana; Arun Tipandjan

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20162985

Authors

Valsa Diana Department of OG, Rajeev Gandhi Government Women and Child Hospital, Puducherry, India
Arun Tipandjan Department of Medical Research, Indira Gandhi Government General Hospital and Post Graduate Institute, Puducherry, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20162985

Keywords:

Caesarean section, Elective, Emergency, Complications

Abstract

Background: The aim of the current study was to compare the maternal and fetal outcomes of emergency and elective caesarean deliveries.

Methods: A prospective case comparative study was conducted at the Government Maternity Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Puducherry, from August 2005 to July 2006.

Results: A total of 301 caesarean deliveries occurred during the study period. The percentages of the primi-gravida as well as the nulli-parous women were significantly higher among emergency caesarean section than that in elective caesarean section (χ²=12.52, P<0.0001). The percentages of previous caesarean sections was significantly higher among those who had elective caesarean than those had emergency caesarean section in the present delivery (χ²=14.73, P=0.0001). Among emergency caesarean section 25.8% had abdominal distension, whereas it was present only in 8.7% of the elective cases. Of the 16 new born with postnatal complications in the emergency group, 14 died, one had convulsion and the remaining one was a stillbirth. In the elective group there were 4 deaths.

Conclusions: It was inferred that both elective and emergency caesarean imposes certain complications to the mother and the fetes. However, maternal and fetal complications were felt very high in emergency caesarean than elective. Proper planning can help obstetric practitioners to avoid complications.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Rao BK. Global aspects of a rising caesarean section rate. In Women's health today: perspectives on current research and clinical practice. The proceedings of the XIV world congress of obstetrics and gynecology, Montreal 1994:59-64.

World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet. 1985;2:436-7.

Dewhurst’s Textbook of Obstetrics and Gynaecology for post graduates Seventh edition. Edited by D. Keith Edmonds. Malpresentation, Malposition, cephalopelvic disproportion and obstetric procedures. Blackwell publishing. London. 2007:223-4.

Landon MB, Hauth JC, Lenevo KL, Spong CY. Maternal and perinatal outcome associated with a trial of labor after prior caesarean delivery. N England J Med. 2005;352:1718-20.

Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Leindecker S, Varner MW, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. Obstetrical and gynecological survey. 2005;60:291-3.

Adashek JA, Peaceman AM, Lopez-Zeno JA, Minogue JP, Socol ML. Factors contributing to the increased cesarean birth rate in older parturient women. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 1993;169:936-40.

Blackwell publishing. London 2007. Hall MH. Variation in caesarean section rate: maternal mortality higher after c-section. British Medical Journal. 1994;308:654-55.

Hall MH. Variation in caesarean section rate. Maternal mortality higher after caesarean section. BMJ: British Medical Journal. 1994;308:654. Rehana N , Reena S. Maternal and fetal outcomes in elective and emergency caesarean sections at a teaching hospital in north India. A retrospective study. Journal of Advance Researches in Biological Sciences. 2013;5:5-9.

Sowmya M, Dutta I. Comparative Study of Neonatal outcome in Ceasarean section done in referred cases vs Elective Ceasarean delivery in a rural medical college hospital. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences. 2014; 24:13993-8.

Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, et al. Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the 2005 WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet. 2006;367:1819-29.

Hasssan S, Tariq S, Javaid MK. Comparative analysis of problems encountered between patients of elective caesarean section and patient for whom elective caesarean section was planned but ended up in emergency. Professional Med J. 2008;15:211-5.

Hassan S, Tariq S, Javaid MK. Emergency caesarean section; Comparative analysis of problems encountered between patients of elective caesarean section and patient for whom elective caesarean section was planned but ended up in emergency. Prof Med J. 2008;15:211-5.

Promila J, Harneet K, Vidushi B, Annika J A. Comparison of Maternal and Fetal Outcome in Elective and Emergency Caesarean FCS 8 Sections. Indian Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2012 ;2(3).

Factors affecting the rate and Indications of primary CS FCS 9. Available at: http://www.bahrainmedicalbulletin.com/december_2001/factors.pdf.

Burrows LJ, Meyn LA, Weber AM. Maternal morbidity associated with vaginal versus cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2004;103:907-12.

Leigh DA, Emmanuel FX, Sedgwick J, Dean R. Post-operative urinary tract infection and wound infection in women undergoing caesarean section: a comparison of two study periods in 1985 and 1987. Journal of Hospital infection. 1990;15(2):107-16.

Daniel S, Viswanathan M, Simi, Nazeema. Comparison of Fetal Outcomes of Emergency and Elective Caesarean Sections in a Teaching Hospital in Kerala. Academic medical journal of India. 2014;23.

Daniel S, Viswanathan M, Simi BN, Nazeema A. Comparison of Fetal Outcomes of Emergency and Elective Caesarean Sections in a Teaching Hospital in Kerala. Academic Medical Journal of India. 2014;2:32-6.