There is Only a Modest Increase in Neonatal Respiratory Morbidity Following Early Term Elective Cesarean in a South Indian Population
Elective cesarean deliveries (ECD) are still performed prior to 39 weeks. This study aimed to identify risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity (NRM) following ECD near term, in a South Indian population. Specifically, study aimed to measure the additional healthcare burden due to large number of ECDs performed prior to 39 weeks, in this local population.
We analyzed NRM among 1329 deliveries (584 ECD and 745 spontaneous vaginal delivery, SVD) in a tertiary hospital over 2 years. Neonates were grouped into: A: 35+0–36+6 weeks, B: 37+0–38+6 weeks, and C: ≥39 weeks. NRM was compared between ECD versus SVD.
Majority (433/584) of ECDs were performed between 37+0 and 38+6 weeks. Overall, 32% received steroid prophylaxis. Of 1329 newborns, 18/584 (3.82%) in ECD and 6/745 (0.8%) in SVD group developed NRM (p value of 0.004, OR 3.9, CI 1.54–9.93). Need of respiratory support among ECD was 4.28% compared to 0.53% in SVD (p < 0.001, OR 8.28; CI 2.86–23.94). However, comparing neonates born by ECD between groups B Vs C; there was only a modest increase in NRM (2.07 vs 0.9%; p 0.48, OR 2.3 with CI 0.29–18.4) and in need of respiratory support (2.54 vs 0.9%; p 0.47, OR 2.84; CI 0.36–22.2).
NRM following early term ECD continues to be a healthcare burden in India. Interestingly in this South Indian population, early term ECDs caused only modest increase in NRM, and this ethnic variation requires further evaluation to determine ideal time for ECD in local population.
KeywordsNeonatal respiratory morbidity Transient tachypnoea of newborn Respiratory distress syndrome Persistent pulmonary hypertension Elective cesarean at term Elective cesarean near term
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
All authors have filled in the conflicts of interest form. All 4 authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Work described has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication anywhere else; that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as by the responsible authorities—tacitly or explicitly—at the institute where the work has been carried out. The publisher will not be held legally responsible should there be any claims for compensation.
Ethical consent for the work has been given by the institutional ethical committee. This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 4.Caesarean section. National collaborating centre for women’s and children’s health. Commissioned by the national institute of health and clinical excellence. Clinical guideline 132. 2nd ed. Regent’s Park, London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2011. p. 1–105.Google Scholar
- 8.Vidic Z, Blickstein I, Štucin Gantar I, et al. Timing of elective cesarean section and neonatal morbidity: a population-based study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(15):2460–2.Google Scholar
- 12.Swarnkar K, Swarnkar M. Neonatal respiratory distress in early neonatal period and its outcome. Int J Biomed Adv Res. 2015;6(09):643–7.Google Scholar
- 13.Daniel S, Viswanathan M, Simi BN, et al. Comparison of fetal outcomes of emergency and elective cesarean sections in a teaching hospital in Kerala. Acad Med J India. 2014;2(1):32–6.Google Scholar