Caesarean section

A team of obstetricians performing a Caesarean section in a modern hospital.

A Caesarean section (US: Cesarean section), also C-section, Caesarian section, Cesarian section, Caesar, etc., is a surgical procedure in which one or more incisions are made through a mother's abdomen (laparotomy) and uterus (hysterotomy) to deliver one or more babies, or, rarely, to remove a dead fetus. A late-term abortion using Caesarean section procedures is termed a hysterotomy abortion and is very rarely performed.

A Caesarean section is usually performed when a vaginal delivery would put the baby's or mother's life or health at risk, although in recent times it has been also performed upon request for childbirths that could otherwise have been natural.[1][2][3] In recent years the rate has risen to a record level of 46% in China and to levels of 25% and above in many Asian countries, Latin America, and the USA.[4]

Contents

Etymology

There are three theories about the origin of the name:

  1. The name for the procedure is said to derive from a Roman legal code called "Lex Caesarea", which allegedly contained a law prescribing that the baby be cut out of its mother's womb in the case that she dies before giving birth.[5]
  2. The derivation of the name is also often attributed to an ancient story, told in the first century A.D. by Pliny the Elder, which claims that an ancestor of Caesar was delivered in this manner.[6]
  3. An alternative etymology suggests that the procedure's name derives from the Latin verb caedere (supine stem caesum), "to cut," in which case the term "Caesarean section" is redundant. Proponents of this view consider the traditional derivation to be a false etymology, though the supposed link with Julius Caesar has clearly influenced the spelling. (A corollary suggesting that Julius Caesar himself derived his name from the operation is refuted by the fact that the cognomen "Caesar" had been used in the Julii family for centuries before his birth,[7] and the Historia Augusta cites three possible sources for the name Caesar, none of which have to do with Caesarean sections or the root word caedere.)

The link with the Roman dictator Julius Caesar, or with Roman Emperors generally, exists in other languages as well. For example, the modern German, Danish, Dutch and Hungarian terms are respectively Kaiserschnitt, kejsersnit, keizersnede, and császármetszés (literally: "Emperor's cut").[8] The German term has also been imported into Japanese (帝王切開) and Korean (제왕 절개), both literally meaning "emperor incision." The South Slavic term is carski rez, which literally means tzar cut, whereas the Western Slavic (Polish) has an analogous term: cesarskie cięcie. The Russian term kesarevo secheniye (кесарево сечение) literally means Caesar's section. The Arabic term (القيصرية) also means pertaining to Caesar or literally Caesarean. The Hebrew term ניתוח קיסרי translates literally as Caesarean Surgery. In Romania and Portugal it is usually called cesariana, meaning from (or related to) Caesar.According to Shahnameh ancient Persian book,the hero Rostam was the first person who was born with this method and term (Rostamineh) (رستمينه) is corresponded to Caesarean.

Orthography

History

Successful Caesarean section performed by indigenous healers in Kahura, Uganda. As observed by R. W. Felkin in 1879.

Pliny the Elder theorized that Julius Caesar's name came from an ancestor who was born by Caesarean section, but the truth of this is debated (see the article on the Etymology of the name of Julius Caesar). The Ancient Roman Caesarean section was first performed to remove a baby from the womb of a mother who died during childbirth. Caesar's mother, Aurelia, lived through childbirth and successfully gave birth to her son, ruling out the possibility that the Roman Dictator and General was born by Caesarean section. The Catalan saint, Raymond Nonnatus (1204-1240), received his surname — from the Latin non natus ("not born") — because he was born by Caesarean section. His mother died while giving birth to him.[10]

In 1316 the future Robert II of Scotland was delivered by Caesarean section — his mother, Marjorie Bruce, died. This may have been the inspiration for Macduff in Shakespeare's play Macbeth". (see below).

Caesarean section usually resulted in the death of the mother; the first recorded incidence of a woman surviving a Caesarean section was in 1500, in Siegershausen, Switzerland: Jakob Nufer, a pig gelder, is supposed to have performed the operation on his wife after a prolonged labour. For most of the time since the sixteenth century, the procedure had a high mortality. However, it was long considered an extreme measure, performed only when the mother was already dead or considered to be beyond help. In Great Britain and Ireland the mortality rate in 1865 was 85%. Key steps in reducing mortality were:

European travelers in the Great Lakes region of Africa during the 19th century observed Caesarean sections being performed on a regular basis.[11] The expectant mother was normally anesthetized with alcohol, and herbal mixtures were used to encourage healing. From the well-developed nature of the procedures employed, European observers concluded that they had been employed for some time.[11]

The first successful Caesarean section to be performed in America took place in what was formerly Mason County Virginia (now Mason County West Virginia) in 1794. The procedure was performed by Dr. Jesse Bennett on his wife Elizabeth.[12]

On March 5, 2000, Inés Ramírez performed a caesarean section on herself and survived, as did her son, Orlando Ruiz Ramírez. She is believed to be the only woman to have performed a successful Caesarean section on herself.

An early account of Caesarean section in Iran is mentioned in the book of Shahnameh, written around 1000 AD, and relates to the birth of Rostam, the national legendary hero of Iran [13][14].

Types

Pulling out the baby.
A Caesarean section in progress.
Suturing of the uterus after extraction.
Closed Incision for low transverse abdominal incision after stapling has been completed.

There are several types of Caesarean section (CS). An important distinction lies in the type of incision (longitudinal or latitudinal) made on the uterus, apart from the incision on the skin.

In many hospitals, especially in Argentina, the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Australia, and New Zealand the mother's birth partner is encouraged to attend the surgery to support the mother and share the experience. The anaesthetist will usually lower the drape temporarily as the child is delivered so the parents can see their newborn.

Indications

A 7-week old Caesarean section scar and linea nigra visible on a 31-year-old mother.

Caesarean section is recommended when vaginal delivery might pose a risk to the mother or baby. Not all of the listed conditions represent a mandatory indication, and in many cases the obstetrician must use discretion to decide whether a caesarean is necessary. Some indications for caesarean delivery are:

Complications of labor and factors impeding vaginal delivery such as

Other complications of pregnancy, preexisting conditions and concomitant disease such as

Other

Risks

One of the most common risks: 2 weeks after the Caesarean section, fluid retention in the wound. Incision had to be opened to use a Negative pressure wound therapy unit to drain the body fluids to prevent infection.

Risks for the mother

The mortality rate for both Caesarian sections and vaginal birth, in the Western world, continues to drop steadily. In 2000, the mortality rate for Caesareans in the United States were 20 per 1,000,000.[18] The UK National Health Service gives the risk of death for the mother as three times that of a vaginal birth.[19] However, it is misleading to directly compare the mortality rates of vaginal and caesarean deliveries. Women with severe medical conditions, or higher-risk pregnancies, often require a Caesarean section which can distort the mortality figures.

A study published in the 13 February 2007 issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal found that the absolute differences in severe maternal morbidity and mortality was small, but that the additional risk over vaginal delivery should be considered by women contemplating an elective caesarean delivery and by their physicians.[20]

As with all types of abdominal surgery, a Caesarean section is associated with risks of post-operative adhesions, incisional hernias (which may require surgical correction) and wound infections.[18] If a Caesarean is performed under emergency situations, the risk of the surgery may be increased due to a number of factors. The patient's stomach may not be empty, increasing the anaesthesia risk.[21] Other risks include severe blood loss (which may require a blood transfusion) and post spinal headaches.[18]

A study published in the June 2006 issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology found that women who had multiple Caesarean sections were more likely to have problems with later pregnancies, and recommended that women who want larger families should not seek Caesarean section as an elective. The risk of placenta accreta, a potentially life-threatening condition, is only 0.13% after two Caesarean sections but increases to 2.13% after four and then to 6.74% after six or more surgeries. Along with this is a similar rise in the risk of emergency hysterectomies at delivery. The findings were based on outcomes from 30,132 caesarean deliveries.[22]

It is difficult to study the effects of caesarean sections because it can be difficult to separate out issues caused by the procedure itself versus issues caused by the conditions that require it. For example, a study published in the February 2007 issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology found that women who had just one previous caesarean section were more likely to have problems with their second birth. Women who delivered their first child by Caesarean delivery had increased risks for malpresentation, placenta previa, antepartum hemorrhage, placenta accreta, prolonged labor, uterine rupture, preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth in their second delivery. However, the authors conclude that some risks may be due to confounding factors related to the indication for the first caesarean, rather than due to the procedure itself.[23]

Risks for the child

This list covers the most commonly discussed risks to the child. Some risks are rare, and as with most medical procedures the likelihood of any risk is highly dependant on individual factors such as whether other pregnancy complications exist, whether the operation is planned or done as an emergency measure, and how and where it is performed.

Risks for both mother and child

Due to extended hospital stays, both the mother and child are at risk for developing a hospital-borne infection.[18]

Studies have shown that mothers who have their babies by caesarean take longer to first interact with their child when compared with mothers who had their babies vaginally.[18]

Incidence

The World Health Organization estimates the rate of Caesarean sections at between 10% and 15% of all births in developed countries. In 2004, the Caesarean rate was about 20% in the United Kingdom, while the Canadian rate was 22.5% in 2001-2002.[28]

In Italy the incidence of Caesarean sections is particularly high, although it varies from region to region.[29] In Campania, 60% of 2008 births reportedly occurred via Caesarean sections.[30] In the Rome region, the mean incidence is around 44%, but can reach as high as 85% in some private clinics. [2][31]

In the United States the Caesarean rate has risen 48% since 1996,[32] reaching a level of 31.8% in 2007.[32] A 2008 report found that fully one-third of babies born in Massachusetts in 2006 were delivered by Caesarean section. In response, the state's Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Judy Ann Bigby, announced the formation of a panel to investigate the reasons for the increase and the implications for public policy.[33]

Among developing countries, Brazil has one of the highest rates of caesarean sections in the world. In the public health network, the rate reaches 35%, while in private hospitals the rate approaches 80%.

Studies have shown that continuity of care with a known carer may significantly decrease the rate of Caesarean delivery[34] but there is also research that appears to show that there is no significant difference in caesarean rates when comparing midwife continuity care to conventional fragmented care.[35]

More emergency caesareans—about 66%—are performed during the day than during the night.[36]

Analyzing the rise in caesarean section rates

The US National Institutes of Health says that rises in rates of caesarean sections are not, in isolation, a cause for concern, but may reflect changing reproductive patterns:

The World Health Organization has determined an “ideal rate” of all cesarean deliveries (such as 15 percent) for a population. One surgeon's opinion is that there is no consistency in this ideal rate, and artificial declarations of an ideal rate should be discouraged. Goals for achieving an optimal cesarean delivery rate should be based on maximizing the best possible maternal and neonatal outcomes, taking into account available medical and health resources and maternal preferences. This opinion is based on the idea that if left unchallenged, optimal cesarean delivery rates will vary over time and across different populations according to individual and societal circumstances.[37]

However, some commentators are concerned by the rise and have noted several evidence-based studies. Louise Silverton, deputy general-secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, says that not only has society’s tolerance for pain and illness been “significantly reduced”, but also that women are scared of pain and think that if they have a caesarean there will be less, if any, pain. It is the opinion of Silverton and the Royal College of Midwives that “women have lost their confidence in their ability to give birth."[38]

Silverton's analysis is controversial among some surgeons. Dr Maggie Blott, a consultant obstetrician at University College Hospital, London and then a Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) spokeswoman on caesareans (and Vice President of the RCOG), responded: 'There isn't any evidence to support Louise Silverton's view that increasingly pain-averse women are pushing up the caesarean rate. There's an undercurrent that caesarean sections are a bad thing, but they can be life-saving.'[38]

A previously unexplored hyposthesis for the increasing section rate is the evolution of birth weight and maternal pelvis size. It is proposed that since the advent of successful Caesarean birth over the last 150 years, mothers with a small pelvis and babies with a large birth weight have survived and contributed to these traits increasing in the population. Such a hypothesis is based upon the idea that even without fears of malpractice, without maternal obesity and diabetes, and without other widely quoted factors, the C-section rate would continue to rise simply due to slow changes in population genetics.[39]

Elective caesarean sections

Caesarean sections are in some cases performed for reasons other than medical necessity. Reasons for elective caesareans vary, with a key distinction being between hospital or doctor-centric reasons and mother-centric reasons. Critics of doctor-ordered Caesareans worry that Caesareans are in some cases performed because they are profitable for the hospital, because a quick caesarean is more convenient for an obstetrician than a lengthy vaginal birth, or because it is easier to perform surgery at a scheduled time than to respond to nature's schedule and deliver a baby at an hour that is not predetermined.[40].

In this context, it is worth remembering that many studies have shown that operations performed out-of-hours tend to have more complications (both surgical and anaesthetic) [41]. For this reason if a caesarean is anticipated to be likely to be needed for a woman, it may be preferable to perform this electively (or pre-emptively) during daylight operating hours, rather than wait for it to become an emergency with the increased risk of surgical and anaesthetic complications that can follow from emergency surgery.

Another contributing factor for doctor-ordered procedures may be fear of medical malpractice lawsuits. Italian gynaecologyst Enrico Zupi, whose clinic in Rome Mater Dai was under media attention for carrying a record of caesarian sections (90% over total birth), explained: “We shouldn't be blamed. Our approach must be understood. We doctors are often sued for events and complications that cannot be classified as malpractice. So we turn to defensive medicine. We will keep acting this way as long as medical mistakes are not depenalized. We are not martyrs. So if a pregnant woman is facing an even minimum risk, we suggest her to [get a c-section]” [29]

Studies of United States women have indicated that married white women giving birth in private hospitals are more likely to have a Caesarean section than poorer women even though they are less likely to have complications that may lead to a Caesarean section being required. The women in these studies have indicated that their preference for Caesarean section is more likely to be partly due to considerations of pain and vaginal tone.[42] In contrast to this, a recent study in the British Medical Journal retrospectively analysed a large number of caesarean sections in England and stratified them by social class. Their finding was that Caesarean sections are not more likely in women of higher social class than in women in other classes.[43] While such mother-elected Caesareans do occur, the prevalence of them does not appear to be statistically significant, while a much larger number of women wanting to have a vaginal birth find that the lack of support and medico-legal restrictions led to their Caesarean. Some have suggested that due to the comparative risks of caesarean section with an uncomplicated vaginal delivery, a patients should be discouraged or forbidden from choosing it.[44]

Some 42% of obstetricians believe the media and women are responsible for the rising caesarean section rates[45]. Some studies, however, conclude that relatively few women wish to be delivered by caesarean section..[46].

Anaesthesia

Both general and regional anaesthesia (spinal, epidural or combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia) are acceptable for use during caesarean section. Regional anaesthesia is preferred as it allows the mother to be awake and interact immediately with her baby.[47] Other advantages of regional anesthesia include the absence of typical risks of general anesthesia: pulmonary aspiration (which has a relatively high incidence in patients undergoing anesthesia in late pregnancy) of gastric contents and Oesophageal intubation.[48]

Regional anaesthesia is used in 95% of deliveries, with spinal and combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia being the most commonly used regional techniques in scheduled caesarean section.[49] Regional anaesthesia during caesarean section is different to the analgesia (pain relief) used in labor and vaginal delivery. The pain that is experienced because of surgery is greater than that of labor and therefore requires a more intense nerve block. The dermatomal level of anesthesia required for caesarean delivery is also higher than that required for labor analgesia.[48]

General anesthesia may be necessary because of specific risks to mother or child. Patients with heavy, uncontrolled bleeding may not tolerate the hemodynamic effects of regional anesthesia. General anesthesia is also preferred in very urgent cases, such as severe fetal distress, when there is no time to perform a regional anesthesia.

Vaginal birth after caesarean

While Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) are not uncommon today, their numbers are shrinking[50]. The medical practice until the late 1970s was "once a caesarean, always a caesarean" but a consumer-driven movement supporting VBAC changed the medical practice. Rates of VBAC in the 80s and early 90s soared, but more recently the rates of VBAC have dramatically dropped owing to medico-legal restrictions.

In the past, caesarean sections used a vertical incision which cut the uterine muscle fibres in an up and down direction (a classical caesarean). Modern caesareans typically involve a horizontal incision along the muscle fibres in the lower portion of the uterus (hence the term lower uterine segment caesarean section, LUSCS/LSCS). The uterus then better maintains its integrity and can tolerate the strong contractions of future childbirth. Cosmetically the scar for modern caesareans is below the "bikini line".

Obstetricians and other caregivers differ on the relative merits of vaginal and caesarean section following a caesarean delivery; some still recommend a caesarean routinely, others do not. What should be emphasized in modern obstetric care is that the decision should be a mutual decision between the obstetrician and the mother/birth partner after assessing the risks and benefits of each type of delivery. As is the case for all surgical procedures a patient signed form relating to informed consent must be obtained prior to surgery attesting the completeness of patient information because of reasonable and viable alternatives to maternal choice CS.

In the United States of America, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) modified the guidelines on vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery in 1999 and again in 2004[51]. This modification to the guideline including the addition of following recommendation:

Because uterine rupture may be catastrophic, VBAC should be attempted in institutions equipped to respond to emergencies with physicians immediately available to provide emergency care.[52]

This recommendation has, in some cases, had a major impact on the availability of VBACs to birthing mothers in the United States. For example, a study of the change in frequency of VBAC deliveries in California after the change in guidelines, published in 2006, found that the VBAC rate fell to 13.5% after the change, compared with 24% VBAC rate before the change[53]. The new recommendation has been interpreted by many hospitals as indicating that a full surgical team must be standing by to perform a caesarean section for the full duration of a VBAC woman's labor. Hospitals that prohibit VBACs entirely are said to have a 'VBAC ban'. In these situations, birthing mothers are forced to choose between having a repeat caesarean section, finding an alternate hospital in which to deliver their baby or attempting delivery outside the hospital setting[54].

Recovery Period Typically the recovery time depends on the patient and their pain/ inflammation levels. Doctors do recommend no strenuous work i.e. lifting objects over 10 lbs., running, walking up stairs, or athletics for up to two weeks.

External links

Within Judaism

There is a dispute among the poskim (Rabbinic authorities) as to whether a first born son from a Cesarean section has the laws of a Bechor.[55]

References

  1. ↑ "Fear a factor in surgical births". The Sydney Morning Herald. 2007-10-07. http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/fear-a-factor-in-surgical-births/2007/10/06/1191091421081.html. 
  2. ↑ Kiwi caesarean rate continues to rise - New Zealand news on Stuff.co.nz
  3. ↑ Finger, C. (2003). "Caesarean section rates skyrocket in Brazil. Many women are opting for Caesareans in the belief that it is a practical solution.". Lancet 362 (9384): 628. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14204-3. PMID 12947949. 
  4. ↑ "C-section rates around globe at ‘epidemic’ levels". AP / msnbc.com. Jan. 12, 2010. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34826186/. Retrieved February 21, 2010. 
  5. ↑ England, Pam and Rob Horowitz, Birthing From Within, p. 149
  6. ↑ Pliny the Elder, Historia naturalis 7.47.
  7. ↑ About.com
  8. ↑ For a summary (in German), of an article (also in German) that deals usefully with many of the relevant historical and linguistic questions raised here, go here.
  9. ↑ Elsevier (2007). Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary (31st ed.). Philadelphia: Elsevier. ISBN 978-1-4160-2364-7 
  10. ↑ "St. Raymond Nonnatus". Catholic Online. http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=314. Retrieved 2006-07-26. 
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 http://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/cesarean/part2.html
  12. ↑ "Woman's Ills". Time Magazine. 1951-06-18. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,815000,00.html. Retrieved 2009-04-01. 
  13. ↑ Shahbazi, A. Shapur. "RUDĀBA". Encyclopedia Iranica. http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/sup/Rudaba.html. Retrieved 2009-07-19. 
  14. ↑ TORPIN R, VAFAIE I.The birth of Rustam. An early account of cesarean section in Iran.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1961 Jan;81:185-9.
  15. ↑ Turner R (1990). "Caesarean Section Rates, Reasons for Operations Vary Between Countries". Fam Plann Perspect. (Guttmacher Institute) 22 (6): 281–2. doi:10.2307/2135690. http://jstor.org/stable/2135690. 
  16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Savage W (May 2007). "The rising caesarean section rate: a loss of obstetric skill?". J Obstet Gynaecol 27 (4): 339–46. doi:10.1080/01443610701337916. PMID 17654182. 
  17. ↑ Wei Ching T, Kanagalingam D, Hak Koon T (2003). "Rising Caesarean Section Rates–Where Do We Go From Here?". SGH Proceedings 12 (4): 208–12. 
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.6 Pai, Madhukar (2000). "Medical Interventions: Caesarean Sections as a Case Study". Economic and Political Weekly 35 (31): 2755–61. 
  19. ↑ "Caesarean Section". NHS Direct. http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/articles/article.aspx?articleId=71&sectionId=7681. Retrieved 2006-07-26. 
  20. ↑ Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS (February 2007). "Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term". CMAJ 176 (4): 455–60. doi:10.1503/cmaj.060870. PMID 17296957. 
  21. ↑ "Why are Caesareans Done?". Gynaecworld. http://www.gynaecworld.com/pregnancy/pg9.htm#3. Retrieved 2006-07-26. 
  22. ↑ Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. (June 2006). "Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries". Obstet Gynecol 107 (6): 1226–32. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84 (inactive 2008-12-31). PMID 16738145.  (see also review by WebMD.com)
  23. ↑ Kennare R, Tucker G, Heard A, Chan A (February 2007). "Risks of adverse outcomes in the next birth after a first cesarean delivery". Obstet Gynecol 109 (2 Pt 1): 270–6. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000250469.23047.73 (inactive 2008-12-31). PMID 17267823. 
  24. ↑ March of Dimes: Cesarian Birth for Medical Reasons
  25. ↑ March of Dimes: Cesarian Birth for Medical Reasons
  26. ↑ Study: Early Repeat C-Sections Puts Babies At Risk
  27. ↑ Study: Caesarian babies' Diabetes risk
  28. ↑ "Canada's Caesarean section rate highest ever". CTV. April 21, 2004. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20040421/caesarean_rate_040421?s_name=&no_ads=. Retrieved 2006-07-26. 
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 [http://www.corriere.it/cronache/09_gennaio_14/clinica_cesareo_margherita_de_bac_83de8688-e204-11dd-b227-00144f02aabc.shtml= "La clinica dei record: 9 neonati su 10 nati con il parto cesareo"]. Corriere della Sera. January 14, 2009. http://www.corriere.it/cronache/09_gennaio_14/clinica_cesareo_margherita_de_bac_83de8688-e204-11dd-b227-00144f02aabc.shtml=. Retrieved 2009-02-05. 
  30. ↑ "Sagliocco denuncia boom di parti cesarei in Campania". Pupia informazione Campania. January 31, 2009. http://www.pupia.tv/campania/politica/3798/sagliocco-denuncia-boom-parti-cesarei-campania.html=. Retrieved 2009-02-05. 
  31. ↑ "Cesarei, alla Mater Dei il record". TgCOM Mediaset www.tgcom.mediaset.it. January 14, 2009. http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/articolo438555.shtml=. Retrieved 2009-02-05. 
  32. ↑ 32.0 32.1 "Births: Preliminary Data for 2007". National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_12.pdf. Retrieved 2006-11-23. 
  33. ↑ Stephen Smith, "C-sections leap to 1 in 3 births in Bay State, to outstrip US", Boston Globe, February 14, 2008
  34. ↑ Homer CS, Davis GK, Brodie PM, et al. (January 2001). "Collaboration in maternity care: a randomised controlled trial comparing community-based continuity of care with standard hospital care". BJOG 108 (1): 16–22. doi:10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00022-X. PMID 11212998. 
  35. ↑ Hodnett ED; Hodnett, Ellen (2000). "Continuity of caregivers for care during pregnancy and childbirth". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2): CD000062. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000062. PMID 10796108. 
    Hodnett ED; Henderson, Sonja (2008). "WITHDRAWN: Continuity of caregivers for care during pregnancy and childbirth". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4): CD000062. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000062.pub2. PMID 18843605. 
  36. ↑ Goldstick O, Weissman A, Drugan A (Aug 2003). "The circadian rhythm of "urgent" operative deliveries". Isr Med Assoc J 5 (8): 564-6. 
  37. ↑ NIH (2006). "State-of-the-Science Conference Statement. Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request". Obstet Gynecol 107: 1386–97, also [1]. 
  38. ↑ 38.0 38.1 Campbell, Denis. “‘Fear of Pain’ causes a big rise in Caesareans.” 26 October 2008. The Guardian. Retrieved 27 October 2008. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/oct/26/health-women.
  39. ↑ Walsh, Joseph "'Evolution and the Cesarean Section Rate'" September 2008. The American Biology Teacher. http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1662/0002-7685%282008%2970%5B401%3AETCSR%5D2.0.CO%3B2
  40. ↑ MacKenzie IZ, Cooke I, Annan B (May 2003). "Indications for caesarean section in a consultant obstetric unit over three decades". J Obstet Gynaecol 23 (3): 233–8. doi:10.1080/0144361031000098316. PMID 12850849. 
  41. ↑ Cullinane M, Gray A, Hargraves C, Lansdown M, Martin I, Schubert M. Who operates when? - The 2003 Report of the Confidential Enquiry into Perioperative Deaths. http://www.ncepod.org.uk/pdf/2003/03full.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-30. 
  42. ↑ Wagner, Marsden (registration required). Born in the USA: How a Broken Maternity System Must Be Fixed to Put Women and Children First. pp. 42. http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0520245962. 
  43. ↑ Barley K, Aylin P, Bottle A, Jarman B (June 2004). "Social class and elective caesareans in the English NHS". BMJ 328 (7453): 1399. doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7453.1399. PMID 15191977. 
  44. ↑ Bewley S, Cockburn J. (2002). ""The unfacts of 'request' caesarean section". BCOG 109 (6): 597-605. 
  45. ↑ Usha Kiran TS, Jayawickrama NS (July 2002). "Who is responsible for the rising caesarean section rate?". J Obstet Gynaecol 22 (4): 363–5. doi:10.1080/01443610220141263. PMID 12521454. 
  46. ↑ Hildingsson I, Rådestad I, Rubertsson C, Waldenström U (June 2002). "Few women wish to be delivered by caesarean section". BJOG 109 (6): 618–23. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01393.x. PMID 12118637. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/resolve/openurl?genre=article&sid=nlm:pubmed&issn=1470-0328&date=2002&volume=109&issue=6&spage=618. 
  47. ↑ Hawkins JL, Koonin LM, Palmer SK, Gibbs CP (February 1997). "Anesthesia-related deaths during obstetric delivery in the United States, 1979-1990". Anesthesiology 86 (2): 277–84. doi:10.1097/00000542-199702000-00002. PMID 9054245. http://meta.wkhealth.com/pt/pt-core/template-journal/lwwgateway/media/landingpage.htm?issn=0003-3022&volume=86&issue=2&spage=277. Retrieved 2008-08-27. 
  48. ↑ 48.0 48.1 Afolabi BB, Lesi FE, Merah NA (2006). "Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4): CD004350. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004350.pub2. PMID 17054201. 
  49. ↑ Bucklin BA, Hawkins JL, Anderson JR, Ullrich FA (September 2005). "Obstetric anesthesia workforce survey: twenty-year update". Anesthesiology 103 (3): 645–53. doi:10.1097/00000542-200509000-00030. PMID 16129992. http://meta.wkhealth.com/pt/pt-core/template-journal/lwwgateway/media/landingpage.htm?issn=0003-3022&volume=103&issue=3&spage=645. Retrieved 2008-08-27. 
  50. ↑ “Rates for Total Cesarean Section, Primary Cesarean Section and Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Section (VBAC), United States, 1989-2006.” Childbirth Connection, 2008. Retrieved 25 September 2008.
  51. ↑ American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). "Guideline on Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery". guideline.gov. http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?view_id=1&doc_id=6374. Retrieved 2008-02-09. 
  52. ↑ American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). "Guideline on Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery: Major Recommendations". guideline.gov. http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?view_id=1&doc_id=6374#s23. Retrieved 2008-02-09. 
  53. ↑ Zweifler J, Garza A, Hughes S, Stanich MA, Hierholzer A, Lau M (2006). "Vaginal birth after cesarean in California: before and after a change in guidelines". Ann Fam Med 4 (3): 228–34. doi:10.1370/afm.544. PMID 16735524. 
  54. ↑ Rita Rubin (2005-08-24). "Battle lines drawn over C-sections". USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-08-23-csection-battle_x.htm. Retrieved 2008-02-09. 
  55. ↑ See Chok Yaakov 470:2; Kaf ha-Chayim 470:3; http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5758/pesach.html
Obstetrical surgery and other procedures (ICD-9-CM V3 72-75)
Diagnostic

sampling: fetal tissue (Chorionic villus sampling · Amniocentesis) · blood (Triple test · Percutaneous umbilical cord blood sampling · Apt test · Kleihauer-Betke test) · Lecithin-sphingomyelin ratio · Fetal fibronectin test

obstetric ultrasonography: Nuchal scan · Biophysical profile (Amniotic fluid index)

other imaging: Fetoscopy

Cardiotocography · (Non-stress test) · Vibroacoustic stimulation

challenge: Contraction stress test

Leopold's maneuvers
Intervention
Fetal surgery · Fetendo · External cephalic version
Delivery
Vaginal delivery

Induction (Artificial rupture of membranes/Amniotomy) · Episiotomy · Symphysiotomy · Forceps in childbirth · Ventouse in childbirth

shoulder dystocia (McRoberts maneuver, Woods' screw maneuver, Zavanelli maneuver) · Manual placenta removal
Caesarean section
Elective · On maternal request · EXIT procedure
Postpartum hemorrhage
Hysterectomy · B-Lynch suture · Sengstaken-Blakemore tube

: OBS

phys/devp

mthr/fetu/infc,

proc, drug(2A/G2C)