Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  16 (2024)
Volume  15 (2023)
Volume  14 (2022)
Volume  13 (2021)
Volume  12 (2020)
Volume  11 (2019)
Volume  10 (2018)
Volume  9 (2017)
Volume  8 (2016)
Volume  7 (2015)
Volume  6 (2014)
Volume  5 (2013)
Volume  4 (2012)
Volume  3 (2011)
Volume  2 (2010)
Volume  1 (2009)
Related articles

VOLUME 16 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2024 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Comparison of Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes in Elective and Emergency Cesarean Hysterectomies: A Prospective Observational Study

Muralikrishnan Nambiar, Anupama Suresh Y, Athulya Sreenivas, Jithin Surendran

Keywords : Atonic postpartum hemorrhage, Cesarean hysterectomy, Maternal outcome, Perinatal outcome, Placenta accreta

Citation Information : Nambiar M, Y AS, Sreenivas A, Surendran J. Comparison of Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes in Elective and Emergency Cesarean Hysterectomies: A Prospective Observational Study. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae 2024; 16 (6):680-683.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-2536

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 19-11-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Objective: Comparing maternal and perinatal outcomes in emergency cesarean hysterectomies with elective cesarean hysterectomies. Materials and methods: “Prospective observational study” conducted at two centers in India from July 2018 to June 2022. Results: About 45 patients underwent cesarean hysterectomy. Out of this, 26.7% underwent elective CH and 73.3% underwent emergency CH. “Placenta accreta” was the most common and the only cause for elective CH (100%) whereas the most common cause for emergency CH was found to be atonic PPH (72.7%) which was followed by ruptured uterus (27.3%). The average duration of surgical procedure was much higher in the emergency CH compared with emergency CH group (177.73 ± 5.88 minutes vs 118.75 ± 4.33 minutes; p < 0.001). ICU care was required in 90.9% patients of emergency CH patients in comparison with 25% of patients who had elective CH (p-value of 0.002). Patients who underwent emergency CH required massive blood transfusions much more frequently (100%) than those who underwent elective CH (25%), (p < 0.001). Duration of stay in ICU in patients who underwent emergency CH was much more compared with elective CH (9.00 ± 3.40 days vs 3.40 ± 4.39 days), (p < 0.001). Severe maternal morbidities were more common in patients who underwent emergency CH (100 vs 25%; p < 0.001). Maternal death was more prevalent in emergency CH when compared with elective CH (18.2% vs zero; p-value of 0.113). Intraoperative bladder injury was seen in 50% of patients who underwent elective CH (p < 0.001). Stillbirth was more common in emergency CH (54.5% vs zero; p-value of 0.001). Babies born with poor APGAR score at 1 minute were much more in emergency CH (100% vs zero; p-value of 0.001). Conclusion: Elective CH has far less adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Whenever adverse outcomes are anticipated with cesarean, it is highly advisable to be prepared for an elective CH.

PDF Share
  1. Singla A, Mundhra R, Phogat L, et al. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: Indications and outcome in a tertiary care setting. J Clin Diagn Res 2017;11(3):QC01–QC03. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/19665.9347.
  2. Godson C. Porro's operation. Br Med J 1884;1:142–159. DOI:10.1136/bmj.1.1204.142.
  3. Todman D. A history of caesarean section: From ancient world to the modern era. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007;47(5):357–361. DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2007.00757.x.
  4. Ozumba BC, Mbagwu SC. Emergency obstetric hysterectomy in eastern Nigeria. Int Surg 1991;76(2):109–111. PMID: 1869383.
  5. Machado LS. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy: Incidence, indications, risk factors and outcome. N Am J Med Sci 2011;3(8): 358–361. DOI: 10.4297/najms.2011.358.
  6. MacDorman MF, Menacker F, Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: Epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clin Perinatol 2008;35(2):293–307. DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2008.03.007.
  7. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107(6):1226–1232. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84.
  8. Ventura SJ, Abma JC, Mosher WD, et al. Estimated pregnancy rates for the United States, 1990-2005: An update. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2009;58(4):1–14. PMID: 20121003.
  9. Smulian JC, Ananth CV, Kinzler WL, et al. Twin deliveries in the United States over three decades: An age-period-cohort analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104(2):278–285. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000134524.58795.bd.
  10. Joseph KS, Rouleau J, Kramer MS, et al. Maternal Health Study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System. Investigation of an increase in postpartum haemorrhage in Canada. BJOG 2007;114(6):751–759. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01316.x.
  11. Owolabi MS, Blake RE, Mayor MT, et al. Incidence and determinants of peripartum hysterectomy in the metropolitan area of the District of Columbia. J Reprod Med 2013;58(3–4):167–172. PMID: 23539887.
  12. Juneja SK, Tandon P, Mohan B, et al. A change in the management of intractable obstetrical hemorrhage over 15 years in a tertiary care center. Int J Appl Basic Med Res 2014;4(Suppl 1):S17–S19. DOI: 10.4103/2229-516X.140710.
  13. Knight M, UKOSS. Peripartum hysterectomy in the UK: management and outcomes of the associated haemorrhage. BJOG 2007;114(11): 1380–1387. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01507.
  14. Tapisiz OL, Altinbas SK, Yirci B, et al. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy in a tertiary hospital in Ankara, Turkey: A 5-year review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;286(5):1131–1134. DOI: P 10.1007/s00404-012-2434.
  15. Selman AE. Caesarean hysterectomy for placenta praevia/accreta using an approach via the pouch of Douglas. BJOG 2016;123(5): 815–819. DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13762.
  16. Allam IS, Gomaa IA, Fathi HM, et al. Incidence of emergency peripartum hysterectomy in Ain-shams University Maternity Hospital, Egypt: a retrospective study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014;290(5): 891–896. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-014-3306-5.
  17. Shamsa A, Harris A, Anpalagan A. Peripartum hysterectomy in a tertiary hospital in Western Sydney. J Obstet Gynaecol 2015;35(4): 350–353. DOI: 10.3109/01443615.2014.961907
  18. Pathiraja PDM, Jayawardane A. Evaluation of peripartum hysterectomy in a tertiary care unit and its effect on patients’ long-term physical and mental wellbeing: Quest is not over when you save the life. Obstet Gynecol Int 2021;2021:5720264. DOI: 10.1155/2021/5720264.
  19. Nohira O, Onodera T, Isaka K. Emergency postpartum hysterectomy: incidence, trends, indications, and complications. Hypertension Res Pregnancy 2014;2(2):88–93. DOI: 10.14390/jsshp.2.88. Available from: https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jsshp/2/2/2_88/_article/-char/en.
  20. Sharma B, Sikka P, Jain V, et al. Peripartum hysterectomy in a tertiary care hospital: epidemiology and outcomes. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol 2017;33(3):324–328. DOI: 10.4103/joacp.JOACP_380_16.
  21. Qatawneh A, Fram K, Thikerallah F, et al. Emergency peripartum hysterectomy at Jordan University hospital – A teaching hospital experience. Menopause Rev/Przegląd Menopauzalny 2020;19(2): 66–71. DOI: 10.5114/pm.2020.97840.
  22. Ibrahim N, Spence AR, Czuzoj-Shulman N, et al. 498 Incidence and risk factors of bladder injury during cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;224(2):S315. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.12.519.
  23. Nouri B, Pooransari P, Ghorbani F. Evaluation of epidemiology and etiology of cesarean hysterectomy. J Obstet Gynecol Cancer Res (JOCR) 2019; 4(4):146–150.
  24. Banks C, Paterson A, Thomson AJ. Glob Libr Women's Med. ISSN: 1756-2228) 2011. DOI 10.3843/GLOWM.10134.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.