title: Timing of delivery and adverse outcomes in term singleton repeat cesarean deliveries.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the maternal and neonatal risks of elective repeat cesarean delivery compared with pregnancy continuation at different gestational ages, starting from 37 weeks.
  
  
  METHODS
  We analyzed the composite maternal and neonatal outcomes of repeat cesarean deliveries studied prospectively over 4 years at 19 U.S. centers. Maternal outcome was a composite of pulmonary edema, cesarean hysterectomy, pelvic abscess, thromboembolism, pneumonia, transfusion, or death. Composite neonatal outcome consisted of respiratory distress, transient tachypnea, necrotizing enterocolitis, sepsis, ventilation, seizure, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, neonatal intensive care unit admission, 5-minute Apgar of 3 or lower, or death. Outcomes after elective repeat cesarean delivery without labor at each specific gestational age were compared with outcomes for all who were delivered later as a result of labor onset, specific obstetric indications, or both.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Twenty-three thousand seven hundred ninety-four repeat cesarean deliveries were included. Elective delivery at 37 weeks of gestation had significantly higher risks of adverse maternal outcome (odds ratio [OR] 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-2.31), whereas elective delivery at 39 weeks of gestation was associated with better maternal outcome when compared with pregnancy continuation (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.72). Elective repeat cesarean deliveries at 37 and 38 weeks of gestation had significantly higher risks of adverse neonatal outcome (37 weeks OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.73-2.36; 38 weeks OR 1.39 95% CI 1.24-1.56), whereas delivery at 39 and 40 weeks of gestation presented better neonatal outcome as opposed to pregnancy continuation (39 weeks OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68-0.92; 40 weeks OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.43-0.75).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In women with prior cesarean delivery, 39 weeks of gestation is the optimal time for repeat cesarean delivery for both mother and neonate.
authors: Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, Texas, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, University of Miami, Miami, Florida, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, and Case Western Reserve University-MetroHealth Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio; The George Washington University Biostatistics Center, Washington, DC; and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Bethesda, Maryland.
authors: Giuseppe
authors: G
authors: Chiossi
authors: Yinglei
authors: Y
authors: Lai
authors: Mark B
authors: MB
authors: Landon
authors: Catherine Y
authors: CY
authors: Spong
authors: Dwight J
authors: DJ
authors: Rouse
authors: Michael W
authors: MW
authors: Varner
authors: Steve N
authors: SN
authors: Caritis
authors: Yoram
authors: Y
authors: Sorokin
authors: Mary J
authors: MJ
authors: O'Sullivan
authors: Baha M
authors: BM
authors: Sibai
authors: John M
authors: JM
authors: Thorp
authors: Susan M
authors: SM
authors: Ramin
authors: Brian M
authors: BM
authors: Mercer
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D017604:Cesarean Section, Repeat / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017558:Elective Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D005260:Female; D005865:Gestational Age; D006801:Humans; D011247:Pregnancy; D011256:Pregnancy Outcome; D012042:Registries; D018570:Risk Assessment; D055815:Young Adult
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Aug;108(2):286-94
references: 16880297
references: Lancet. 2003 Nov 29;362(9398):1779-84
references: 14654315
references: BMJ. 2008 Jan 12;336(7635):85-7
references: 18077440
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Aug;118(2 Pt 1):323-333
references: 21775849
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Jun;107(6):1386-97
references: 16738168
references: N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 8;360(2):111-20
references: 19129525
references: Pediatrics. 2009 Jun;123(6):e1064-71
references: 19482739
references: Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Apr;90(4):390-7
references: 21306337
references: Lancet. 2009 Sep 19;374(9694):979-988
references: 19656558
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Dec;110(6):1501
references: 18055756
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Apr;105(4):751-6
references: 15802401
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Oct;110(4):801-7
references: 17906012
references: Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2005 Sep 22;54(4):1-8
references: 16220739
references: N Engl J Med. 2009 Apr 9;360(15):1570; author reply 1570-1
references: 19357415
references: Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2010 Jun 21;8:68
references: 20565934
references: BJOG. 2008 May;115(6):726-31
references: 18410656
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2004 May;103(5 Pt 1):907-12
references: 15121564
references: P R Health Sci J. 2002 Jun;21(2):123-5
references: 12166022
references: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Sep;199(3):224-31
references: 18511018
references: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Oct;189(4):1047-52
references: 14586353
references: Acta Paediatr. 2004 May;93(5):643-7
references: 15174788
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Feb;117(2 Pt 1):280-286
references: 21252740
references: N Engl J Med. 2004 Dec 16;351(25):2581-9
references: 15598960