ArticleCureus2024
Optimal Timing of Cesarean Section Following Two or More Prior Cesareans: An Investigation Into Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes (a Two-Center Study).
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to determine the optimal timing of elective cesarean sections for women with two or more prior cesarean deliveries by investigating maternal and neonatal outcomes across different gestational ages (37 weeks, 38 weeks, and 39 weeks). Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Tawam and Kanad Hospitals in Al Ain, United Arab Emirates, including 435 women with previous cesarean deliveries. Data were collected on patient demographics, obstetric history, maternal complications, and neonatal outcomes, such as birth weight, appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration (APGAR) scores, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions, and length of NICU stay. The patients were divided into two groups: those with two prior cesareans and those with three or more. Outcomes were analyzed based on gestational age at delivery. Results Elective cesarean sections constituted 81.0% of the procedures, with no significant difference in the distribution of elective versus emergency cesareans across the studied gestational weeks (P = 0.073). Neonatal outcomes indicated healthy birth weights and low NICU admissions. For women with two prior cesareans, the NICU admission rates were 23.53% for deliveries at 37 weeks, 8.11% at 38 weeks, and 4.35% for deliveries beyond 39 weeks. For women with three or more prior cesareans, NICU admission rates were 18.18% for 37 weeks, 20.00% for 38 weeks, and 10.00% for 39 weeks. The average birth weight increased with gestational age, and NICU stays were longer for earlier deliveries (P = 0.0065 for stays > 5 days). Conclusion The findings suggest that the optimal timing for elective cesarean sections in women with two or more prior cesareans is 39 weeks of gestation. This timing is associated with the best neonatal outcomes, including lower NICU admission rates and healthy birth weights while minimizing the risks associated with earlier deliveries. Scheduling elective cesarean sections at 39 weeks will improve maternal and neonatal health benefits.
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.