Published: 2019-07-26

Retrospective analysis of indications of primary caesarean sections done at a tertiary care hospital

Kamna Datta, P. Singh, Namita Chopra


Background: Caesarean section rates have globally risen above the levels that can be considered medically necessary. The aim of the study is to analyze the rate and indications of caesarean sections for primigravidae in the period 2016 to 2018 at a tertiary care hospital in Delhi.

Methods: It is a retrospective observational study conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at PGIMER and Dr RML Hospital, New Delhi. A total of 552 caesarean deliveries in primigravidae were studied.

Results: The total deliveries during the study period were 3346 and the total caesarean section rate observed was 30.66%. The caesarean section rate among primigravidae was 29.1%. The rate of caesarean section in primigravidae rose from 22.7% in 2016 to 39.3% in 2018 with 17% increase. Majority of them belonged to the age group 20-30 years (79.34%) and 2.53% were elderly primigravidae. Out of the total number of primigravidae caesarean deliveries, 67.2% were performed in emergency and 32.7% were performed electively. Among the emergency caesarean sections performed, 64% of patients had induced labor and 22% had spontaneous labor. The most common indication of caesarean section was fetal distress (19.77%) followed by arrest of labor (17.87%) and malpresentations (8.9%). The short-term caesarean morbidity rate was 25.4% including one mortality. Wound infection was the most common complication.

Conclusions: Various reasons like changing maternal risk profile increased IVF pregnancies, scientific advances, personal choice and medico legal considerations have been cited for increased caesarean rate. Following evidence-based labor protocols, judicious use of cardiotocography, proper patient selection for labor induction and patient education will contribute in reduction of caesarean sections and related complications.


Caesarean section, Fetal distress, Indications, Labor, Morbidity, Primigravidae

Full Text:



Caesarean section on the rise. The Lancet. 2000;356:1697.

Belizán JM, Cafferata ML, Althabe F, Buekens P. Risk of patient choice caesarean. Birth. 2006;33:167-9.

Caughey AB, Cahill AG. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstetric Care Consensus. 2014;1:2-19.

Hannah ME. Planned elective cesarean section: a reasonable choice for some women? CMAJ. 2004;170:813-4.

Minkoff H, Chevenak FA. Elective primary caesarean delivery. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:946-50.

Das RK. Changing Trends in Caesarean Section; Rate and Indications. Int J Contemp Pediatr. 2018;5(5):1733-9.

Gupta M, Garg V. The rate and indications of caesarean section at a tertiary care centre in Jaipur, India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(5):1786-92.

Saxena N, Sharma B, Gupta V, Negi KS. A six year appraisal of caesarean delivery at a teaching hospital In Uttarakhand. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5:4369-72.

Subhashini R, Uma N. Changing trends in caesarean delivery. IAIM. 2015;2(3):96-102.

Naheed I, Malik S, Akhtar M, Khatri N. An audit of increasing caesarean section rate in primigravidae. P J M H S. 2014;8(4):1012.

Yadav RG, Maitra N. Examining cesarean delivery rates using the Robson’s ten group classification. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2016;66(Suppl 1):1.

Singh G, Gupta ED. Rising incidence of caesarean section in rural area in haryana, india: a retrospective analysis. Internet J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;17(2):1-5.

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.

Ji H, Jiang H, Yang L. Factors contributing to the rapid rise of caesarean section: a prospective study of primiparous Chinese women in Shanghai. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008994.

Janoudi G, Kelly S, Yasseen A, Hamam H, Walker M. Factors associated with increased rates of caesarean section in women with advanced maternal age. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015;37(6):517-26.

Babu S, Manjeera ML. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor at term: prospective study of outcome and complications. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(11):4899-907.

Sarma P, Boro RC, Acharjee PS. An analysis of indications of caesarean sections at tezpur medical college and hospital, Tezpur (A Government Hospital). Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5:1364-7.

Jawa A, Garg S, Tater A, Sharma U. Indications and rates of lower segment caesarean section at tertiary care hospital-an analytical study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5:3466-9.

Chavda D, Goswam K, Dudhrejiva K. A cross sectional study of 1000 lower segment cesarean section in obstetrics and gynecology department of P. D. U medical college, Rajkot, Gujarat, India. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(4):1186-91.

Bade P, Kendre V, Jadhav Y, Wadagale A. An analysis of indications for caesarean section at government medical college, Latur. Intern J Recent Trends Sci Technol. 2014;11(1):6-8.

Nikhil A, Desai A, Vijay K, Bhumika K, Riddhi P. Analysis of trends in LSCS rate and indications of LSCS: a study in a medical college hospital GMERS, Sola, Ahmedabad. Int J Pharm Bio-Sci. 2015;2(1):1-5.

Balci O, Gezginc K, Acar A. The outcome analysis of cesarean section cases in one-year period. Gynecol Obstet Reprod Med. 2007;13:6-28.

Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. obstetric care consensus no. 1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ObstetGynecol. 2014;123:693-711.

Chaillet N, Dumont A. Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean section rates: a meta-analysis. Birth. 2007;34:53-64.

Kosmas I, Van der Elst J, Devroey P, Tournaye H. Elective single embryo transfer. The Obstetrician Gynaecol. 2008;10:163-70.

Santhanalakshmi C, Gnanasekaran V, Chakravarthy AR. A retrospective analysis of cesarean section in a tertiary care hospital. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2015;4:2097-9.