ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Is it safe to have multiple repeat cesarean sections? A high volume tertiary care center experience.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Providers' perspective on vaginal birth after cesarean birth: a qualitative systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Pooled it
- Predictors of Postpartum Hemorrhage Following Repeat Cesarean Section: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Pregnancy Outcomes Following Planned Cesarean Section: Experience From a Tertiary Care Hospital in Bahrain.Cureus · 2025Article
- Maternal and Fetal Outcomes after Multiple Cesarean Deliveries.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Multiple Cesarean Section Outcomes and Complications: A Retrospective Study in Jazan, Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Difficulties in Adaptation of the Mother and Newborn via Cesarean Section versus Natural Birth-A Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Repeat low order caesarean delivery, risk factors for complications: A retrospective, longitudinal study.PloS one · 2023Article
- Health-Related Quality-of-Life among Pregnant Women after First, Second, and Multiple Cesarean Sections in the Perinatal Period: A Short-Term Longitudinal Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Effect of blood transfusion during cesarean section on postpartum hemorrhage in a tertiary hospital over a 4-year period.Medicine · 2021Article
- Vaginal delivery in women with HIV in Italy: results of 5 years of implementation of the national SIGO-HIV protocol.Infection · 2019Article
- Outcomes and Complications After Repeat Cesarean Sections Among King Abdulaziz University Hospital Patients.Materia socio-medica · 2019Article
- Does an increased number of cesarean sections result in greater risk for mother and baby in low-risk, late preterm and term deliveries?Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
- Maternal Outcome in Pregnant Women Undergoing Third Caesarean Section After Onset of Labor.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the obstetric outcomes of cesarean section in women who had a history of four or more previous cesarean sections with those who had a history of two or three previous cesarean sections.
methodsTotal 1318 women who underwent repeat cesarean section between January 2013 and January 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 244 (18.5%) had previously had four or more cesarean sections (multiple repeat cesarean section group) and 1074 (81.5%) had previously had two or three cesarean sections (control group). Demographic characteristics and obstetric outcomes were compared using the Independent t and chi-square tests.
resultsThe adhesion rate (p < 0.001), number of blood transfusion (p = 0.044), operation time (p = 0.012), length of hospital stay (p < 0.001) and tubal ligation surgery (p < 0.001) were significantly higher in multiple repeat cesarean section group compared to control group.
conclusionAlthough multiple repeat cesarean section are asscociated with adhesion occurrence, higher number of blood transfusion, increased operation time and length of hospital stay, there is no remarkable difference in serious morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean section.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.