1 / 32

Elective Primary Cesarean Section

Elective Primary Cesarean Section. Paul Wendel, MD Associate Professor Residency Director UAMS Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology. Patient choice Maternal request On demand. All refer to primary cesarean section in the absence of medical/obstetrical indications.

ronda
Download Presentation

Elective Primary Cesarean Section

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Elective Primary Cesarean Section Paul Wendel, MD Associate Professor Residency Director UAMS Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology

  2. Patient choice • Maternal request • On demand All refer to primary cesarean section in the absence of medical/obstetrical indications.

  3. Concept Origins:Most recently traced to 1985 • Stimulated by medicolegal case involving intrapartum fetal neurologic injury • Authors discussed “prophylactic cesarean section” ‘at term’ • Notion of informed consent for route of delivery was introduced • C-section offered as a means of avoiding the risks associated with vaginal delivery Feldman, GB Prophylactic cesarean at term? NEJM 1985; 312 pp. 1264-67

  4. Patient Perspective Elective cesarean sections currently account for 4-18% of all c-sections.

  5. Why do Women ask for C-Sections? • Extreme tocophobia (fear of childbirth) • Death (patient or baby) • Fetal injury • Genital tract injury

  6. When Psychotherapy was employed by trained professionals to address tocophobia: • 2/3 women ultimately chose vaginal birth These same women… • Ultimately viewed their birth experience as good

  7. Physicians’ Perspective • Several studies have been done in UK, New Zealand, Ireland, Canada, Israel regarding physicians’ and midwives’ attitudes toward “elective c-section” • 7-30% of OB/GYN’s and 4.4% of midwives preferred c-sections for themselves if female or their partner if male • 62-81% reported a willingness to perform c-sections on demand

  8. Physicians’ Perspective (con’t) • Similar to their patients, obstetricians cited the following as reasons leading to primary elective c-sections: • Fear of childbirth 27% • Perineal injury 80-95% • Fetal injury 24-39% • Anal or urinary incontinence 81-83% • Sexual dysfunction 58-59% • Convenience 17-39% • Control 39% • Pain 7%

  9. Attitudes of Urogynecologist’s & MFM’s to Elective C-sections • Survey was distributed by UNC via web base • 53% of SMFM/AUGS members responded

  10. Survey Results • Overall, 65% of physicians would perform an elective primary cesarean section • Compared with other countries: • 69% England • 67% Australia/New Zealand

  11. AUGS / SMFM Survey Comparison • 80% of AUGS members vs. 55% of SMFM members for primary elective c-section • 45% of AUGS and 9.5% of SMFM members would choose a primary c-section for themselves or their partners

  12. Ethical Principles • Can an elective c-section for an uncomplicated pregnancy be ethically justified? • Decision making based on: • Beneficence • Nonmaleficence • Autonomy • Justice • Voracity

  13. Ethical Principles • Beneficence: physicians responsibility to promote the patients’ health/welfare • Nonmaleficence: complimentary principle refers to the physician’s obligation to do no harm to the patient • Autonomy: obligates the physician to discuss reasonable alternatives and elicit a decision within the framework of informed consent

  14. Ethical Principles Typically, patients retain a “negative right” (right to decline care) but do not hold a “positive right” (the right to demand care that may be unnecessarily risky or medically unproven).

  15. Ethical Principles • Justice: requires that a physician treat patients fairly and make decisions that consider societal good with respect to limited health resources • Voracity: refers to truthfulness in patient counseling

  16. Committee of the Ethical Aspects of Human Reproduction of the International Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecology (FIGO) in 1999 issued a report regarding c-section for non-medical reasons: • C-section was a surgical procedure • Greater allocation of resources for c-section • Vaginal delivery was safer in long/short term for mother/fetus • Elective c-section was not ethically justified

  17. American College of OB/GYN Committee on Ethics (2003) If a patient requests cesarean section after informed counseling and the physician believes it will promote the overall health of patient and fetus, “…the elective c-section is ethically justified.” If the physician disagrees, the patient should be referred to another provider.

  18. Medical Issues • Historically, c-sections have a higher risk of maternal mortality than vaginal delivery. However, most studies do not adjust for: • Elective vs. emergency c-section • Contributing medical/obstetric conditions

  19. Cape Town, South Africa 1975-1986 • Compared maternal mortality from elective c-section vs. vaginal delivery: • Elective c-section – 23/100,000 RR = 3.8 • Vaginal – 6/100,000

  20. Saches and Colleagues (1988) Study (1954-1985) assessed c-section related mortality rate in Massachusetts Death rate C-sections - 5.9/100,000 vs. Vaginal delivery - 10.8/100,000

  21. Washington State 1987-1996 Large retrospective study addressed postpartum mortality among primiparas (adjusting for age, marital status, preeclampsia): C-section 6.8/100,000 vs. Vaginal delivery 8.2/100,000 *Limited datasets suggest that elective cesarean sections and vaginal deliveries do not increase direct maternal death.

  22. Maternal Morbidities Discussions of puerperal complications must make distinctions between c-sections performed before and after labor and between spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries.

  23. Washington State Retrospective Study 2000 • Association between delivery method and maternal re-hospitalization within 60 days of delivery: • Spontaneous vaginal delivery – 10/1000 • Operative vaginal delivery – 12/1000 • Cesarean section – 17/1000

  24. Philadelphia 1994-1997Retrospective Study • Hospital readmissions by delivery route within 60 days of delivery: • C-sections – 35.6/1000 • Operative vaginal delivery – 29.5/1000 • Spontaneous vaginal delivery – 17.7/1000 • *Study did not distinguish between c-sections with and without labor.

  25. Randomized Multicenter Trial of Management of Breech at Term • Peripartum Maternal Morbidity • Planned Cesarean section – 41/1041 (3.9%) • Planned Vaginal delivery – 33/1042 (3.2%) • *No differences between groups: • Hemorrhage • Genital tract injury • Wound breakdown • Infection

  26. Fetal Morbidity • Original premise: C-section at term would avoid intrapartum fetal neurologic injury • Data suggests fetal neurologic injury affects 2-3/1000 intrapartum events 3,000 – 5,000 elective cesarean sections would be needed to avoid one such injury.

  27. C-section Rate (mid 1970’s – present) • Pooled data from these countries have shown significant rise of c-section rates: • Sweden Canada England Ireland • Australia Denmark Norway U.S. • Cerebral palsy rates have remained stable internationally • C-section is not neuroprotective for the fetus

  28. Birth Injury Available data suggests that “pre-labor” cesarean section does not offer a clear fetal benefit with respect to intracranial, brachial plexus, or fracture injury. May increase the risk of laceration injury in the infant.

  29. Conclusion • The debate over elective c-sections is growing. • Obstetrician should be aware of the issues and their colleagues’ beliefs. • No adequate study has compared elective c-sections and planned SVD. • In the absence of data, professional organizations will have different opinions on ethical acceptability.

  30. Conclusion Available data, though not robust, suggests that overall maternal and perinatal mortality, short- and long-term maternal and neonatal morbidity favor a vaginal delivery.

More Related