Dataset Information

Caesarean delivery and subsequent stillbirth or miscarriage: systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the risk of stillbirth and miscarriage in a subsequent pregnancy in women with a previous caesarean or vaginal delivery.

Design

Systematic review of the published literature including seven databases: CINAHL; the Cochrane library; Embase; Medline; PubMed; SCOPUS and Web of Knowledge from 1945 until November 11(th) 2011, using a detailed search-strategy and cross-checking of reference lists.

Study selection

Cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies examining the association between previous caesarean section and subsequent stillbirth or miscarriage risk. Two assessors screened titles to identify eligible studies, using a standardised data abstraction form and assessed study quality.

Data synthesis

11 articles were included for stillbirth, totalling 1,961,829 pregnancies and 7,308 events. Eight eligible articles were included for miscarriage, totalling 147,017 pregnancies and 12,682 events. Pooled estimates across the stillbirth studies were obtained using random-effect models. Among women with a previous caesarean an increase in odds of 1.23 [95% CI 1.08, 1.40] for stillbirth was yielded. Subgroup analyses including unexplained stillbirths yielded an OR of 1.47 [95% CI 1.20, 1.80], an OR of 2.11 [95% CI 1.16, 3.84] for explained stillbirths and an OR of 1.27 [95% CI 0.95, 1.70] for antepartum stillbirths. Only one study reported adjusted estimates in the miscarriage review, therefore results are presented individually.

Conclusions

Given the recent revision of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines (NICE), providing women the right to request a caesarean, it is essential to establish whether mode of delivery has an association with subsequent risk of stillbirth or miscarriage. Overall, compared to vaginal delivery, the pooled estimates suggest that caesarean delivery may increase the risk of stillbirth by 23%. Results for the miscarriage review were inconsistent and lack of adjustment for confounding was a major limitation. Higher methodological quality research is required to reliably assess the risk of miscarriage in subsequent pregnancies.

SUBMITTER: O'Neill SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3553078 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Caesarean delivery and subsequent stillbirth or miscarriage: systematic review and meta-analysis.

O'Neill Sinéad M SM Kearney Patricia M PM Kenny Louise C LC Khashan Ali S AS Henriksen Tine B TB Lutomski Jennifer E JE Greene Richard A RA

PloS one 20130123 1

<h4>Objective</h4>To compare the risk of stillbirth and miscarriage in a subsequent pregnancy in women with a previous caesarean or vaginal delivery.<h4>Design</h4>Systematic review of the published literature including seven databases: CINAHL; the Cochrane library; Embase; Medline; PubMed; SCOPUS and Web of Knowledge from 1945 until November 11(th) 2011, using a detailed search-strategy and cross-checking of reference lists.<h4>Study selection</h4>Cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studie ...[more]

PMID: 23372739

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCaesarean delivery has increased worldwide, however, the effects on fertility are largely unknown. This systematic review aims to compare subsequent sub-fertility (time to next pregnancy or birth) among women with a Caesarean delivery to women with a vaginal delivery.MethodsSystematic review of the literature including seven databases: CINAHL; the Cochrane Library; Embase; Medline; PubMed; SCOPUS and Web of Knowledge (1945 - October 2012), using detailed search-strategies and reference list cross-checking. Cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies were included. Two assessors reviewed titles, abstracts, and full articles using standardised data abstraction forms and assessed study quality.Results11 articles were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review, of these five articles which adjusted for confounders were combined in a meta-analysis, totalling 750,407 women using fixed-effect models. Previous Caesarean delivery was associated with an increased risk of sub-fertility [pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.90; 95% CI 0.86, 0.93]. Subgroup analyses by parity [primiparous women: OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.87, 0.96; not limited to primiparous women: OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.73, 0.90]; by publication date (pre-2000: OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68, 0.94; post-2000: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.86, 0.94); by length of follow-up (<10 years: OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73, 0.90; >10 years: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87, 0.96); by indication for mode of delivery (specified: 0.92, 95% CI 0.88, 0.97; not specified: OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73, 0.90); by cohort size (<35,000: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67, 0.92; >35,000: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.87, 0.95), by definition of sub-fertility used divided into (birth interval [BI]: OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84, 0.94; inter-pregnancy interval [IPI]: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85, 0.97; and categorical measures: OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73, 0.90); continuous measures: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87, 0.96) were performed. Results of the six studies not included in the meta-analysis (which did not adjust for confounders) are presented individually.ConclusionsThe meta-analysis shows an increased waiting time to next pregnancy and risk of sub-fertility among women with a previous Caesarean delivery. However, included studies are limited by poor epidemiological methods such as variations in the definition of time to next pregnancy, lack of confounding adjustment, or details of the indication for Caesarean delivery. Further research of a more robust methodological quality to better explore any underlying causes of sub-fertility and maternal intent to delay childbearing is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of caesarean deliveries has been increasing. Although intrathecal morphine (ITM) can relieve pain and is widely applied in caesarean deliveries, it is associated with many side effects. Transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB), a new analgesic technology, has also began playing a certain role after caesarean delivery, with fewer adverse effects. This study mainly compares the analgesic and adverse effects of ITM and TAPB in caesarean delivery.MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published before 9 October, 2020 to compare the effects of ITM and TAPB. Primary outcome of the study was the pain score at rest 24 h after caesarean delivery, whereas the secondary outcomes were the pain score at movement 24 h after operation, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), itching, and morphine consumption. For the outcome assessment, we conducted a sensitivity analysis.ResultSix RCTs involving 563 patients and meeting the study inclusion criteria were included in this study. Results indicated no significant difference in the pain score between ITM and TAPB at 24 h of rest or movement. The sensitivity analysis results indicated that the resting pain score (95% CI = - 1.27 to - 0.28; P = 0.002) and 24-h moving pain score (95% CI = - 1.8 to - 0.07; P = 0.03) of the ITM group were lower than those of the TAPB group. The consumption of morphine in the ITM group was lower than in the TAPB group (95% CI = 1.92 to 4.87; P < 0.00001); however, in terms of adverse reactions, the incidence of pruritus (95% CI = 1.17 to 8.26; P = 0.02) and PONV (95% CI = 1.92 to 4.87, P < 0.00001) in the ITM group was higher than in the TAPB group.ConclusionParturients in the ITM and TAPB groups exhibited similar analgesic effects. However, in the sensitivity analysis performed by eliminating the studies causing heterogeneity, the ITM group was found to have superior analgesic effects compared with the TAPB group, with less morphine consumption. Differently, the TAPB group displayed less side effects such as PONV. Therefore, TAPB is still a valuable analgesia option for patients who cannot use ITM for analgesia after caesarean delivery or those having a high risk of PONV.Trial registrationRegistration number: Registered on Prospero with the registration number of CRD42020210135 .

Project description:IntroductionCaesarean delivery under maternal request (CDMR) is a major factor contributing to the rising global rates of caesarean section (CS) procedure. The choice of CDMR without medical indications could provide a sense of assured safety by avoiding the experiences and complications of vaginal birth, and the risks related to an emergency CS. However, it might adversely influence women's breast feeding patterns and produce a long-lasting impact on maternal and neonatal health. This study aims to systematically review the current evidence relating to the effects of intentions of performing CDMR on breast feeding.Methods and analysisA comprehensive literature search will be performed in three English-language electronic databases, major clinical study registries and other sources for original studies reporting the breast feeding outcomes after a planned CDMR or vaginal delivery. The three databases Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched via Ovid from inception to February 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), pseudo-RCTs, cohort studies and case-control studies on this topic will be included. Participants in the experimental or case group should meet the Robson criteria of classes 2B or 4B and have experienced planned CS undertaken for no maternal or foetal indication, whereas participants in the control group have undergone scheduled vaginal delivery. All kinds of breast feeding outcomes will be included. Meta-analyses will be attempted to provide an estimate of the pooled effect and will be stratified by different study designs. A qualitative description will be provided if quantitative synthesis proves to be fruitless.Ethics and disseminationThis study is a secondary literature review that does not need ethical approval. No primary data will be collected from the participants. Findings of this study will be presented at scientific conferences and be published in scientific journals.Prospero registration numberCRD42020160303.

Project description:BackgroundPerinatal health disparities including disparities in caesarean births have been observed between migrant and non-migrant women and some literature suggests that non-medical factors may be implicated. A systematic review was conducted to determine if migrants in Western industrialized countries consistently have different rates of caesarean than receiving-country-born women and to identify the reasons that explain these differences.MethodsReports were identified by searching 12 literature databases (from inception to January 2012; no language limits) and the web, by bibliographic citation hand-searches and through key informants. Studies that compared caesarean rates between international migrants and non-migrants living in industrialized countries and that did not have a 'fatal flaw' according to the US Preventative Services Task Force criteria were included. Studies were summarized, analyzed descriptively and where possible, meta-analyzed.ResultsSeventy-six studies met inclusion criteria. Caesarean rates between migrants and non-migrants differed in 69% of studies. Meta-analyses revealed consistently higher overall caesarean rates for Sub-Saharan African, Somali and South Asian women; higher emergency rates for North African/West Asian and Latin American women; and lower overall rates for Eastern European and Vietnamese women. Evidence to explain the consistently different rates was limited. Frequently postulated risk factors for caesarean included: language/communication barriers, low SES, poor maternal health, GDM/high BMI, feto-pelvic disproportion, and inadequate prenatal care. Suggested protective factors included: a healthy immigrant effect, preference for a vaginal birth, a healthier lifestyle, younger mothers and the use of fewer interventions during childbirth.ConclusionCertain groups of international migrants consistently have different caesarean rates than receiving-country-born women. There is insufficient evidence to explain the observed differences.

Project description:IntroductionWomen with a prior stillbirth or a history of recurrent first trimester miscarriages are at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. However, little is known about the impact of a second trimester pregnancy loss on subsequent pregnancy outcome. This review investigated if second trimester miscarriage or termination for medical reason or fetal anomaly (TFMR/TOPFA) is associated with future adverse pregnancy outcomes.Material and methodsA systematic review of observational studies was conducted. Eligible studies included women with a history of a second trimester miscarriage or termination for medical reasons and their pregnancy outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy. Where comparative studies were identified, studies which compared subsequent pregnancy outcomes for women with and without a history of second trimester loss or TFMR/TOPFA were included. The primary outcome was livebirth, and secondary outcomes included: miscarriage (first and second trimester), termination of pregnancy, fetal growth restriction, cesarean section, preterm birth, pre-eclampsia, antepartum hemorrhage, stillbirth and neonatal death. Studies were excluded if exposure was nonmedical termination or if related to twins or higher multiple pregnancies. Electronic searches were conducted using the online databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed and The Cochrane Library) and searches were last updated on June 16, 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Where possible, meta-analysis was undertaken. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023375033.ResultsTen studies were included, reporting on 12 004 subsequent pregnancies after a second trimester pregnancy miscarriage. No studies were found on outcomes after second trimester TFMR/TOPFA. Overall, available data were of "very low quality" using GRADE assessment. Meta-analysis of cohort studies generated estimated outcome frequencies for women with a previous second trimester loss as follows: live birth 81% (95% CI: 64-94), miscarriage 15% (95% CI: 4-30, preterm birth 13% [95% CI: 6-23]).The pooled odds ratio for preterm birth in subsequent pregnancy after second trimester loss in case-control studies was OR 4.52 (95% CI: 3.03-6.74).ConclusionsVery low certainty evidence suggests there may be an increased risk of preterm birth in a subsequent pregnancy after a late miscarriage. However, evidence is limited. Larger, higher quality cohort studies are needed to investigate this potential association.

Project description:To systematically review and critically evaluate studies reporting alcohol exposure during pregnancy and miscarriage. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ProQuest Theses for publications from January 1970 to January 2019. We identified studies about alcohol exposure during pregnancy and miscarriage. Information about study population, alcohol exposure assessment, outcome definition, covariates, and measures of association was collected. We assessed study quality using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data were abstracted by 2 investigators independently. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate the association between alcohol exposure and miscarriage risk and performed subgroup analyses to determine robustness of results to study differences. For studies reporting dose-specific effects, a pooled dose-response association was estimated using generalized least squares regression with and without restricted cubic spline terms for number of drinks consumed per week. Of 2,164 articles identified, 24 were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analysis of data from 231,808 pregnant women finds those exposed to alcohol during pregnancy have a greater risk of miscarriage compared to those who abstained (odds ratio [OR] 1.19, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.12, 1.28). Estimates did not vary by study design, study country, or method of alcohol ascertainment. For alcohol use of 5 or fewer drinks per week, each additional drink per week was associated with a 6% increase in miscarriage risk (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01, 1.10). Common study limitations reflect challenges inherent to this research, including difficulty recruiting participants early enough in pregnancy to observe miscarriage and collecting and quantifying information about alcohol consumption during pregnancy that accurately reflects use. This review provides evidence that alcohol consumption during pregnancy is associated with a dose-mediated increase in miscarriage risk. Future studies evaluating change in alcohol use in pregnancy are needed to provide insight into how alcohol consumption prior to pregnancy recognition impacts risk.

Dataset Information

Caesarean delivery and subsequent stillbirth or miscarriage: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective

Design

Study selection

Data synthesis

Conclusions

Publications

Caesarean delivery and subsequent stillbirth or miscarriage: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets