Download PDF
AJP Rep 2016; 06(03): e251-e259
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1585577
Case Report
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Mode of Delivery in Premature Neonates: Does It Matter?

Diana A. Racusin
1   Division of Maternal–Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
,
Kathleen M. Antony
1   Division of Maternal–Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
,
Jennifer Haase
1   Division of Maternal–Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
,
Melissa Bondy
2   Dan L Duncan Comprehensive Cancer Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
,
Kjersti M. Aagaard
1   Division of Maternal–Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

20 May 2016

09 June 2016

Publication Date:
22 July 2016 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Despite the current prevalence of preterm births, no clear guidelines exist on the optimal mode of delivery. Our objective was to investigate the effects of mode of delivery on neonatal outcomes among premature infants in a large cohort.

Study Design We applied a retrospective cohort study design to a database of 6,408 births. Neonates were stratified by birth weight and a composite score was calculated to assess neonatal outcomes. The results were then further stratified by fetal exposure to antenatal steroids, birth weight, and mode of delivery.

Results No improvement in neonatal outcome with cesarean delivery (CD) was noted when subjects were stratified by mode of delivery, both in the presence or absence of antenatal corticosteroid administration. In the 1,500 to 1,999 g subgroup, there appears to be an increased risk of respiratory distress syndromes in neonates born by CD.

Conclusion In our all-comers cohort, replicative of everyday obstetric practice, CD did not improve neonatal outcomes in preterm infants.

Keywords

low birth weight - prematurity - mode of delivery - cesarean delivery

Note

This article was presented as a poster at the 34th Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine; February 3–8, 2014, New Orleans, LA (abstract 662). The second portion of our work has been accepted for presentation as a poster at the 36th Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine; February 1–6, 2016, Atlanta, GA (abstract # 842).


 

  • References

  • 1 Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice bulletin no. 130: prediction and prevention of preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120 (4) 964-973
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Matthews TJ, MacDorman MF. Infant mortality statistics from the 2010 period linked birth/infant death data set. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2013; 62 (8) 1-26
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Stoelhorst GMSJ, Rijken M, Martens SE , et al; Leiden Follow-Up Project on Prematurity. Changes in neonatology: comparison of two cohorts of very preterm infants (gestational age <32 weeks): the Project On Preterm and Small for Gestational Age Infants 1983 and the Leiden Follow-Up Project on Prematurity 1996-1997. Pediatrics 2005; 115 (2) 396-405
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Soleimani F, Zaheri F, Abdi F. Long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes after preterm birth. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2014; 16 (6) e17965
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Harper RG, Rehman KU, Sia C , et al. Neonatal outcome of infants born at 500 to 800 grams from 1990 through 1998 in a tertiary care center. J Perinatol 2002; 22 (7) 555-562
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Schlapbach LJ, Adams M, Proietti E , et al; Swiss Neonatal Network & Follow-up Group. Outcome at two years of age in a Swiss national cohort of extremely preterm infants born between 2000 and 2008. BMC Pediatr 2012; 12 (1) 198
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Lee HC, Gould JB. Survival advantage associated with cesarean delivery in very low birth weight vertex neonates. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107 (1) 97-105
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Lee HC, Gould JB. Survival rates and mode of delivery for vertex preterm neonates according to small- or appropriate-for-gestational-age status. Pediatrics 2006; 118 (6) e1836-e1844
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Deulofeut R, Sola A, Lee B, Buchter S, Rahman M, Rogido M. The impact of vaginal delivery in premature infants weighing less than 1,251 grams. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105 (3) 525-531
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Shankaran S, Fanaroff AA, Wright LL , et al. Risk factors for early death among extremely low-birth-weight infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186 (4) 796-802
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Westgren M, Dolfin T, Halperin M , et al. Mode of delivery in the low birth weight fetus. Delivery by cesarean section independent of fetal lie versus vaginal delivery in vertex presentation. A study with long-term follow-up. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1985; 64 (1) 51-57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Jonas HA, Khalid N, Schwartz SM. The relationship between Caesarean section and neonatal mortality in very-low-birthweight infants born in Washington State, USA. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1999; 13 (2) 170-189
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Malloy MH. Impact of cesarean section on neonatal mortality rates among very preterm infants in the United States, 2000-2003. Pediatrics 2008; 122 (2) 285-292
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Mercer BM. Mode of delivery for periviable birth. Semin Perinatol 2013; 37 (6) 417-421
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Lumley J. Method of delivery for the preterm infant. BJOG 2003; 110 (Suppl. 20) 88-92
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Kramer MS, Platt R, Yang H , et al. Secular trends in preterm birth: a hospital-based cohort study. JAMA 1998; 280 (21) 1849-1854
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Horbar JD, Badger GJ, Carpenter JH , et al; Members of the Vermont Oxford Network. Trends in mortality and morbidity for very low birth weight infants, 1991-1999. Pediatrics 2002; 110 (1 Pt 1) 143-151
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin no. 115: Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116 (2 Pt 1) 450-463
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Osmundson SS, Garabedian MJ, Lyell DJ. Risk factors for classical hysterotomy by gestational age. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122 (4) 845-850
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Bakhshi T, Landon MB, Lai Y , et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of repeat cesarean delivery in women with a prior classical versus low transverse uterine incision. Am J Perinatol 2010; 27 (10) 791-796
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Riskin A, Riskin-Mashiah S, Lusky A, Reichman B ; Israel Neonatal Network. The relationship between delivery mode and mortality in very low birthweight singleton vertex-presenting infants. BJOG 2004; 111 (12) 1365-1371
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Kato EH, Yamada H, Matsumoto Y, Hattori S, Makinoda S, Fujimoto S. Relation between perinatal factors and outcome of very low birth weight infants. J Perinat Med 1996; 24 (6) 677-686
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Melchor JC, Aranguren G, López JA, Avila M, Fernández-Llebrez L, Linares A. Perinatal outcome of very low birthweight infants by mode of delivery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1992; 38 (3) 181-187
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Muhuri PK, Macdorman MF, Menacker F. Method of delivery and neonatal mortality among very low birth weight infants in the United States. Matern Child Health J 2006; 10 (1) 47-53
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Alfirevic Z, Milan SJ, Livio S. Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery for preterm birth in singletons. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (9) CD000078
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Wylie BJ, Davidson LL, Batra M, Reed SD. Method of delivery and neonatal outcome in very low-birthweight vertex-presenting fetuses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 198 (6) 640.e1-640.e7 , discussion e1–e4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Reddy UM, Zhang J, Sun L, Chen Z, Raju TNK, Laughon SK. Neonatal mortality by attempted route of delivery in early preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207 (2) 117.e1-117.e8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Mercer BM, Rabello YA, Thurnau GR , et al; NICHD-MFMU Network. The NICHD-MFMU antibiotic treatment of preterm PROM study: impact of initial amniotic fluid volume on pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 194 (2) 438-445
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 MacDorman MF, Declercq E, Zhang J. Obstetrical intervention and the singleton preterm birth rate in the United States from 1991-2006. Am J Public Health 2010; 100 (11) 2241-2247
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Högberg U, Holmgren PA. Infant mortality of very preterm infants by mode of delivery, institutional policies and maternal diagnosis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2007; 86 (6) 693-700
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Delnord M, Blondel B, Drewniak N , et al; Euro-Peristat Preterm Group. Varying gestational age patterns in cesarean delivery: an international comparison. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14: 321
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Bottoms SF, Paul RH, Iams JD , et al; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Network of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units. Obstetric determinants of neonatal survival: influence of willingness to perform cesarean delivery on survival of extremely low-birth-weight infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176 (5) 960-966
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar