| Caesarean section |
| Intervention |
A team of obstetricians performing a Caesarean section in a modern hospital. |
| ICD-9-CM |
74 |
| MeSH |
D002585 |
Horizontal and vertical Caesarian sections.
A Caesarean section, (also C-section, Caesarian section, Cesarean section, Caesar, etc.) is a surgical procedure in which one or more incisions are made through a mother's abdomen (laparotomy) and uterus (hysterotomy) to deliver one or more babies, or, rarely, to remove a dead fetus. A late-term abortion using Caesarean section procedures is termed a hysterotomy abortion (not to be confused with hysterectomy) and is very rarely performed. The first modern Caesarean section was performed by German gynecologist Ferdinand Adolf Kehrer in 1881.
A Caesarean section is usually performed when a vaginal delivery would put the baby's or mother's life or health at risk. More recently it has been performed upon request for childbirths that may otherwise have been natural.[1][2][3] In recent years the rate has risen to a record level of 46% in China and to levels of 25% and above in many Asian, European and Latin American countries.[4] In 2007, in the United States, the Caesarean section rate was 31.8%.[5] Across Europe, there are significant differences between countries: in Italy the Caesarean section rate is 40%, while in the Nordic countries it is only 14%.[6]
The Roman Lex Regia (royal law), later the Lex Caesarea (imperial law) of Numa Pompilius (715–673 BC), required the child of a mother dead in childbirth be cut from her womb. [7] This seems to have begun as a religious requirement that mothers not be buried pregnant, [8] and to have evolved into a way of saving the fetus, with Roman practice requiring a living mother be in her 10th month of pregnancy before the procedure was resorted to, reflecting the knowledge that she could not survive the delivery. [9] Speculation that the Roman emperor Julius Caesar was born by the method now known as C-section is apparently false.[10] Although Caesarean sections were performed in Roman times, no classical source records a mother surviving such a delivery,[7][11] – the earliest recorded survival dates to 1500 AD[12] – and Caesar's mother Aurelia Cotta lived to serve him as an advisor in his adulthood.[9]
The term has also been explained as deriving from the verb caedere, to cut, with children delivered this way referred to as caesones. Pliny the Elder refers to a certain Julius Caesar (not the famous statesman, but a remote ancestor of his) as ab utero caeso, "cut from the womb", a godly attribute comparable to rumours about the birth of Alexander the Great.[clarification needed][13] This and Caesar's name may have led to a false etymological connection with the ancient monarch. Notably, the Oxford English Dictionary does not credit a derivation from "caedere", and defines Caesarean birth as "the delivery of a child by cutting through the walls of the abdomen when delivery cannot take place in the natural way, as was done in the case of Julius Cæsar".
Some link with Julius Caesar, or with Roman emperors in general, exists in other languages, as well. For example, the modern German, Danish, Dutch, Swedish and Hungarian terms are respectively Kaiserschnitt, kejsersnit, keizersnede, "kejsarsnitt" and császármetszés (literally: "Emperor's cut").[14] The German term has also been imported into Japanese (帝王切開 teiōsekkai) and Korean (제왕 절개 jewang jeolgae), both literally meaning "emperor incision". Similar in western Slavic (Polish) cięcie cesarskie, (Czech) císařský řez and (Slovak) cisársky rez (literally "imperial cut"), whereas the south Slavic term is Serbian царски рез and Slovenian cárski réz, which literally means "tzar" cut. The Russian term kesarevo secheniye (Кесарево сечение késarevo sečénije) literally means Caesar's section. The Arabic term (ولادة قيصرية wilaada qaySaríyya) also means pertaining to Caesar or literally Caesarean. The Hebrew term ניתוח קיסרי (nitúakh Keisári) translates literally as Caesarean surgery. In Romania and Portugal, it is usually called cesariana, meaning from (or related to) Caesar. According to Shahnameh ancient Persian book, the hero Rostam was the first person who was born with this method and term رستمينه (rostamineh) is corresponded to Caesarean.
Finally, the Roman praenomen (given name) Caeso was said to be given to children who were born via C-section. While this was probably just folk etymology made popular by Pliny the Elder, it was well known by the time the term came into common use.
Successful Caesarean section performed by indigenous healers in Kahura,
Uganda. As observed by R. W. Felkin in 1879.
Bindusara (born c. 320 BC, ruled 298 – c.272 BC), the second Mauryan Samrat (emperor) of India, is said to be the first child born by surgery.[16] His mother, wife of Chandragupta Maurya, accidentally consumed poison and died when she was close to delivering him. Chanakya, the Chandragupta's teacher and advisor, made up his mind that the baby should survive. He cut open the belly of the queen and took out the baby, thus saving the baby's life.[17][18]
According to the Shahnameh, the Simurgh instructed Zal upon how to perform a Caesarean section, thus saving Rudaba and the child Rostam.[19]
According to the ancient Chinese Records of the Grand Historian, Luzhong, a sixth-generation descendant of the Yellow Emperor, had six sons, all born by "cutting open the body". The sixth son Jilian founded the House of Mi that ruled the State of Chu (c. 1030–223 BC).[20]
In the Irish mythological text the Ulster Cycle, the character Furbaide Ferbend is said to have been born by posthumous Caesarean section, after his mother was murdered by his evil aunt Medb.
The Babylonian Talmud, an ancient Jewish religious text, mentions a procedure similar to the Caesarean section. The procedure is termed yotzei dofen.[18]
Pliny the Elder theorized that Julius Caesar's name came from an ancestor who was born by Caesarean section, but the truth of this is debated (see the article on the Etymology of the name of Julius Caesar). The Ancient Roman Caesarean section was first performed to remove a baby from the womb of a mother who died during childbirth. Caesar's mother, Aurelia, lived through childbirth and successfully gave birth to her son, ruling out the possibility the Roman dictator and general was born by Caesarean section. The Catalan saint Raymond Nonnatus (1204–1240), received his surname—from the Latin non natus ("not born")—because he was born by Caesarean section. His mother died while giving birth to him.[21]
In 1316, the future Robert II of Scotland was delivered by Caesarean section—his mother, Marjorie Bruce, died. This may have been the inspiration for Macduff in Shakespeare's play Macbeth.).
Caesarean section usually resulted in the death of the mother; the first recorded incidence of a woman surviving a Caesarean section was in the 1580s, in Siegershausen, Switzerland: Jakob Nufer, a pig gelder, is supposed to have performed the operation on his wife after a prolonged labour.[22] However, there is some basis for supposing that women regularly survived the operation in Roman times.[23] For most of the time since the 16th century, the procedure had a high mortality rate. However, it was long considered an extreme measure, performed only when the mother was already dead or considered to be beyond help. In Great Britain and Ireland, the mortality rate in 1865 was 85%. Key steps in reducing mortality were:
European travelers in the Great Lakes region of Africa during the 19th century observed Caesarean sections being performed on a regular basis.[24] The expectant mother was normally anesthetized with alcohol, and herbal mixtures were used to encourage healing. From the well-developed nature of the procedures employed, European observers concluded they had been employed for some time.[24]
The first successful Caesarean section to be performed in America took place in what was formerly Mason County, Virginia (now Mason County, West Virginia), in 1794. The procedure was performed by Dr. Jesse Bennett on his wife Elizabeth.[25]
On March 5, 2000, Inés Ramírez performed a Caesarean section on herself and survived, as did her son, Orlando Ruiz Ramírez. She is believed to be the only woman to have performed a successful Caesarean section on herself.[citation needed]
An early account of Caesarean section in Iran is mentioned in the book of Shahnameh, written around 1000 AD, and relates to the birth of Rostam, the national legendary hero of Iran.[26][27]
Suturing of the uterus after extraction.
Closed Incision for
low transverse abdominal incision after stapling has been completed.
There are several types of Caesarean section (CS). The type of incision used is dependent upon a number of factors and will be either (longitudinal or latitudinal). The incision on the skin may be different from the one used internally. There are two main types of incision used:
- The classical incision involves a midline longitudinal cut in the uterus which allows a larger space to deliver the baby. However, it is rarely performed today, as it is more prone to complications and is only typically used in situations where the baby needs to be delivered very quickly and the latitudinal cut cannot be used for some reason
- The lower uterine incision involves a transverse cut just above the edge of the bladder and results in less blood loss and is easier to repair. It is the procedure most commonly used today. The external cut is most typically horizontal too and is often referred to as the bikini cut as the skin incision is typically below the bikini line just above the pubic hair
There are planned caesareans and emergency caesareans. Though terminology varies from one hospital or one practitioner to the next, the following categories hold:
- Planned, Scheduled and Elective – These are pre-arranged caesareans. In this instance you may have requested the caesarean or had it recommended by a practitioner and labour has not usually begun. The term elective has become an emotive one often used in the "too posh to push" debate [28]
- Emergency, Unplanned, Critical and Crash – These refer to situations where a vaginal birth is planned but events have taken over before or during labour and the baby is delivered by caesarean [29]
Additional relevant terms:
- Repeat caesarean - A delivery which ends with another caesarean (planned or emergency) when a patient has had one for a previous birth. Typically, a repeat caesarean is performed through the existing scar
- Caesarean hysterectomy - A caesarean followed by the removal of the uterus. This rare operation may be performed in cases of intractable bleeding or in which the placenta cannot be separated from the uterus. The procedure can be used as a form of birth control
- Extraperitoneal caesarean - No longer in use since the advent of antibiotics as the technique has greater degree of risk associated
A 7-week old Caesarean section
scar and
linea nigra visible on a 31-year-old mother.
Caesarean section is typically recommended when vaginal delivery might pose a risk to the mother or baby. Not all of the listed conditions represent a mandatory indication. Many fall into a rather 'grey' area where it should be a negotiation between the practitioner and the mother as to whether a caesarean is going to be performed. Informed choice ought to be instrumental in birth planning, however this is frequently not the case where 'grey' indications are identified. "Many grey areas exist and what is labelled a complication in one hospital is not necessarily the case in the birthing unit down the road." [30] Knowing more 'balanced' detail about indications is crucial to successfully negotiating your birth preferences.
Indications for caesarean delivery E.g. complications of labor and factors impeding vaginal delivery:
Several of the indications above are open to negotiation and choice, based on informed risk analysis, ('failure to progress' in particular). [31]
Other complications of pregnancy, pre-existing conditions and concomitant disease:
- pre-eclampsia
- hypertension [32]
- multiple births
- Transverse baby (baby lies across the uterus)
- Breech baby (baby presents bottom down rather than head down)
- Precious (high risk) fetus
- HIV infection of the mother
- Sexually transmitted infections, such as genital herpes (which can be passed on to the baby if the baby is born vaginally, but can usually be treated in with medication and do not require a Caesarean section)
- previous Caesarean section (though this is controversial – see discussion below)
- prior problems with the healing of the perineum (from previous childbirth or Crohn's disease)
- Bicornuate uterus
- Rare cases of posthumous birth after the death of the mother
Several of the indications above are open to negotiation and choice, based on informed risk analysis, ('multiple birth', 'Breech', 'previous caesarean' 'HIV' in particular). [33]
Other
- Lack of obstetric skill, e.g. practitioners not being skilled/comfortable performing breech births, multiple births, etc. (In this case women may birth under these circumstances naturally. However, practitioners are not always trained in proper procedures) [34]
- Improper Use of Technology (Electric Fetal Monitoring [EFM])[34][35] and unfortunately in some places dedicated staff for the duration of labor cannot be guaranteed making certain vaginal births more stressful without support.
The mortality rate for both Caesarian sections and vaginal birth, in the Western world, continues to drop steadily. In 2000, the mortality rate for Caesareans in the United States were 20 per 1,000,000.[36] The UK National Health Service gives the risk of death for the mother as three times that of a vaginal birth.[37] However, it is misleading to directly compare the mortality rates of vaginal and Caesarean deliveries. Women with severe medical conditions, or higher-risk pregnancies, often require a Caesarean section which can distort the mortality figures.
A study in the Canadian Medical Association Journal found the absolute differences in severe maternal morbidity and mortality was small - 19.3 additional cases in 1000 or three times the risk, but this additional risk over vaginal delivery should be considered by women contemplating an elective Caesarean delivery and by their physicians.[38]
As with all types of abdominal surgeries, a Caesarean section is associated with risks of postoperative adhesions, incisional hernias (which may require surgical correction) and wound infections.[36] If a Caesarean is performed under emergency situations, the risk of the surgery may be increased due to a number of factors. The patient's stomach may not be empty, increasing the anaesthesia risk.[39] Other risks include severe blood loss (which may require a blood transfusion) and postdural-puncture spinal headaches.[36]
A study published in Obstetrics and Gynecology found women who had multiple Caesarean sections were more likely to have problems with later pregnancies, and recommended women who want larger families should not seek Caesarean section as an elective. The risk of placenta accreta, a potentially life-threatening condition, is only 0.13% after two Caesarean sections, but increases to 2.13% after four and then to 6.74% after six or more surgeries. Along with this is a similar rise in the risk of emergency hysterectomies at delivery. The findings were based on outcomes from 30,132 Caesarean deliveries.[40]
It is difficult to study the effects of Caesarean sections because it can be difficult to separate out issues caused by the procedure itself versus issues caused by the conditions that require it. For example, one study found women who had just one previous Caesarean section were more likely to have problems with their second birth. Women who delivered their first child by Caesarean delivery had increased risks for malpresentation, placenta previa, antepartum hemorrhage, placenta accreta, prolonged labor, uterine rupture, preterm birth, low birth weight, and stillbirth in their second deliveries. However, the authors concluded some risks may be due to confounding factors related to the indication for the first Caesarean, rather than due to the procedure itself.[41]
This list is currently incomplete and should not be taken as comprehensive or reflective of current research. It covers some of the most commonly discussed risks to the child posed by the procedure itself rather than the medical indications that may call for it. Some risks are rare, and as with most medical procedures, the likelihood of any risk is highly dependent on individual factors, such as whether other pregnancy complications exist, whether the operation is planned or done as an emergency measure, and how and where it is performed.
- Wet lung: Retention of fluid in the lungs can occur if not expelled by the pressure of contractions during labor.[42]
- Potential for early delivery and complications: Preterm delivery is possible if due-date calculation is inaccurate. One study found an increased risk of complications if a repeat elective Caesarean section is performed even a few days before the recommended 39 weeks.[43]
- Higher infant mortality risk: In C-sections performed with no indicated risk (singleton at full term in a head-down position), the risk of death in the first 28 days of life has been cited as 1.77 per 1,000 live births among women who had C-sections, compared to 0.62 per 1,000 for women who delivered vaginally [44]
In the United Kingdom, in 2008, the Caesarean section rate was 24%. [45] In Ireland the rate was 26.1% in 2009.[46]The Canadian rate was 26% in 2005–2006.[47] Australia has a high Caesarean section rate, at 31% in 2007.[48]
In Italy the incidence of Caesarean sections is particularly high, although it varies from region to region.[49] In Campania, 60% of 2008 births reportedly occurred via Caesarean sections.[50] In the Rome region, the mean incidence is around 44%, but can reach as high as 85% in some private clinics.[51][52]
In the United States the Caesarean rate has risen 48% since 1996,[53] reaching a level of 31.8% in 2007.[53] A 2008 report found that fully one-third of babies born in Massachusetts in 2006 were delivered by Caesarean section. In response, the state's Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Judy Ann Bigby, announced the formation of a panel to investigate the reasons for the increase and the implications for public policy.[54]
China has been cited as having the highest rates of C-sections in the world at 46% as of 2008[55]
Studies have shown that continuity of care with a known carer may significantly decrease the rate of Caesarean delivery[56] but there is also research that appears to show that there is no significant difference in Caesarean rates when comparing midwife continuity care to conventional fragmented care.[57]
More emergency Caesareans—about 66%—are performed during the day rather than during the night.[58]
The World Health Organization officially withdrew its previous recommendation of a 15% C-section rates in June 2010. Their official statement read, "There is no empirical evidence for an optimum percentage. What matters most is that all women who need caesarean sections receive them." [59]
The US National Institutes of Health says rises in rates of Caesarean sections are not, in isolation, a cause for concern, but may reflect changing reproductive patterns:
The World Health Organization has determined an “ideal rate” of all cesarean deliveries (such as 15 percent) for a population. One surgeon's opinion is that there is no consistency in this ideal rate, and artificial declarations of an ideal rate should be discouraged. Goals for achieving an optimal cesarean delivery rate should be based on maximizing the best possible maternal and neonatal outcomes, taking into account available medical and health resources and maternal preferences. This opinion is based on the idea that if left unchallenged, optimal cesarean delivery rates will vary over time and across different populations according to individual and societal circumstances.[60]
The number of C-sections performed has grown rapidly, for example, a fourfold increase from 1971 to 1991 (from 4.2 per 100 births)[citation needed]. This may be accredited to the improved technology in detecting prebirth distress. Malpractice has been looked into because of the rapid increase. Some argue the higher costs of C-section births compared to regular births make physicians quicker to recommend surgery. Usually, if a doctor makes a recommendation, people are quick to take it to heart and act upon it. The effect of relative C-section price on C-section usage should be examined.
However, some commentators are concerned by the rise and have noted several evidence-based studies. Louise Silverton, deputy general-secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, says not only has society’s tolerance for pain and illness been “significantly reduced”, but also women are scared of pain and think if they have a Caesarean, there will be less, if any, pain. In the opinion of Silverton and the Royal College of Midwives, “women have lost their confidence in their ability to give birth."[61]
Silverton's analysis is controversial among some surgeons. Dr Maggie Blott, a consultant obstetrician at University College Hospital, London and then a Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) spokeswoman on Caesareans (and Vice President of the RCOG), responded: 'There isn't any evidence to support Louise Silverton's view that increasingly pain-averse women are pushing up the Caesarean rate. There's an undercurrent that Caesarean sections are a bad thing, but they can be life-saving.'[61]
A previously unexplored hypothesis for the increasing rate is the evolution of birth weight and maternal pelvis size. It is proposed that since the advent of successful Caesarean birth over the last 150 years, mothers with small pelvises and babies with large birth weights have survived and contributed to these traits, increasing in the population percentage. Such a hypothesis is based upon the idea that even without fears of malpractice, without maternal obesity and diabetes, and without other widely quoted factors, the C-section rate would continue to rise simply due to slow changes in population genetics.[62]
Caesarean sections are in some cases performed for reasons other than medical necessity. These can vary, with a key distinction being between hospital- or doctor-centric reasons and mother-centric reasons. Critics of doctor-ordered Caesareans worry that Caesareans are in some cases performed because they are profitable for the hospital, because a quick Caesarean is more convenient for an obstetrician than a lengthy vaginal birth, or because it is easier to perform surgery at a scheduled time than to respond to nature's schedule and deliver a baby at an hour that is not predetermined.[63] Another reason for doctors to recommend C-sections is money. In China, doctors are compensated based on the monetary value of medical treatments offered. As a result, they have an incentive to persuade mothers to choosing the more expensive C-section.
In this context, it is worth remembering many studies have shown operations performed out-of-hours tend to have more complications (both surgical and anaesthetic).[64] For this reason, if a Caesarean is anticipated to be likely to be needed for a woman, it may be preferable to perform this electively (or pre-emptively) during daylight operating hours, rather than wait for it to become an emergency with the increased risk of surgical and anaesthetic complications that can follow from emergency surgery.
Another contributing factor for doctor-ordered procedures may be fear of medical malpractice lawsuits. Italian gynaecologyst Enrico Zupi, whose clinic in Rome, Mater Dei, was under media attention for carrying a record of Caesarian sections (90% over total birth), explained: “We shouldn't be blamed. Our approach must be understood. We doctors are often sued for events and complications that cannot be classified as malpractice. So we turn to defensive medicine. We will keep acting this way as long as medical mistakes are not depenalized. We are not martyrs. So if a pregnant woman is facing an even minimum risk, we suggest she gets a C-section "[49]
Studies of United States women have indicated married white women giving birth in private hospitals are more likely to have a Caesarean section than poorer women, although they are less likely to have complications that may lead to a Caesarean section being required. The women in these studies have indicated their preference for Caesarean section is more likely to be partly due to considerations of pain and vaginal tone.[65] In contrast, a recent study in the British Medical Journal retrospectively analysed a large number of Caesarean sections in England and stratified them by social class. Their finding was Caesarean sections are not more likely in women of higher social class than in women in other classes.[66] Some have suggested, due to the comparative risks of Caesarean section with an uncomplicated vaginal delivery, patients should be discouraged or forbidden from choosing it.[67]
Some 42% of obstetricians believe the media and women are responsible for the rising Caesarean section rates.[68] Some studies, however, conclude that relatively few women wish to be delivered by Caesarean section.[69]
Both general and regional anaesthesia (spinal, epidural or combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia) are acceptable for use during Caesarean section. Regional anaesthesia is preferred as it allows the mother to be awake and interact immediately with her baby.[70] Other advantages of regional anesthesia include the absence of typical risks of general anesthesia: pulmonary aspiration (which has a relatively high incidence in patients undergoing anesthesia in late pregnancy) of gastric contents and Oesophageal intubation.[71]
Regional anaesthesia is used in 95% of deliveries, with spinal and combined spinal and epidural anaesthesia being the most commonly used regional techniques in scheduled Caesarean section.[72] Regional anaesthesia during Caesarean section is different to the analgesia (pain relief) used in labor and vaginal delivery. The pain that is experienced because of surgery is greater than that of labor and therefore requires a more intense nerve block. The dermatomal level of anesthesia required for Caesarean delivery is also higher than that required for labor analgesia.[71]
General anesthesia may be necessary because of specific risks to mother or child. Patients with heavy, uncontrolled bleeding may not tolerate the hemodynamic effects of regional anesthesia. General anesthesia is also preferred in very urgent cases, such as severe fetal distress, when there is no time to perform a regional anesthesia.
While vaginal births after Caesarean (VBAC) are not uncommon today, the rate of VBAC has declined to include less than 10% of births after previous Cesarean.[73] [74] Although Caesarean deliveries made up only 5% of births overall in the USA until the mid-1970s, it was commonly believed that for women with previous Caesarean sections, "Once a Caesarean, always a Caesarean". A consumer-driven movement supporting VBAC changed medical practice and led to soaring rates of VBAC in the 1980s and early 1990s, but rates of VBAC dramatically dropped after the publication of a highly publicized scientific study showing worse outcomes for VBACs as compared to repeat Caesarean and the resulting medicolegal changes within obstetrics.[75] In 2010, the National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology all released statements in support of increasing VBAC access and rates.[76][77][78][79]
In the past, Caesarean sections used a vertical incision which cut the uterine muscle fibres in an up and down direction (a classical Caesarean). Modern Caesareans typically involve a horizontal incision along the muscle fibres in the lower portion of the uterus (hence the term lower uterine segment Caesarean section). The uterus then better maintains its integrity and can tolerate the strong contractions of future childbirth. Cosmetically, the scar for modern Caesareans is below the "bikini line".
Obstetricians and other caregivers differ on the relative merits of vaginal and Caesarean section following a Caesarean delivery; some still recommend a Caesarean routinely, while others do not. In the US, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) modified the guidelines on vaginal birth after previous Caesarean delivery in 1999, 2004, and again in 2010.[80] In 2004, this modification to the guideline included the addition of the following recommendation:
Because uterine rupture may be catastrophic, VBAC should be attempted in institutions equipped to respond to emergencies with physicians immediately available to provide emergency care.[81]
In 2010, ACOG modified these guidelines again to express more encouragement of VBAC, but maintained it should still be undertaken at facilities capable of emergency care, though patient autonomy in assuming increased levels of risk should be respected (ACOG Practice Bulletin Number 115, August 2010).
The recommendation for access to emergency care during trial of labor has, in some cases, had a major impact on the availability of VBACs to birthing mothers in the US. For example, a study of the change in frequency of VBAC deliveries in California after the change in guidelines, published in 2006, found the VBAC rate fell to 13.5% after the change, compared with 24% VBAC rate before the change.[82] The new recommendation has been interpreted by many hospitals as indicating a full surgical team must be standing by to perform a Caesarean section for the full duration of a VBAC woman's labor. Hospitals that prohibit VBACs entirely are said to have a 'VBAC ban'. In these situations, birthing mothers are forced to choose between having a repeat Caesarean section, finding an alternate hospital in which to deliver their babies or attempting delivery outside the hospital setting.[83]
Most recently, enhanced access to VBAC has been recommended based on updated scientific data on the safety of VBAC as compared to repeat Caesarean section, including the following recommendation emerging from the NIH VBAC conference panel in March 2010, "We recommend that hospitals, maternity care providers, health care and professional liability insurers, consumers, and policymakers collaborate on the development of integrated services that could mitigate or even eliminate current barriers to trial of labor."[76] The U.S Department of Health and Human Services' Healthy People 2020 initiative includes objectives to reduce the primary cesarean rate and to increase the VBAC rate by at least 10% each.[79]
Typically, the recovery time depends on the patient and her pain tolerance and inflammation levels. Doctors do recommend abstention from strenuous work (i.e., lifting objects over 10 lbs (4.5 kg)., running, walking up stairs, or athletics) for up to six months, and a waiting period of ~18 months before attempting to conceive another child.
There is a dispute among the poskim (Rabbinic authorities) as to whether a first born son from a Caesarean section has the laws of a bechor.[84] Traditionally, a male child delivered by Caesarean is not eligible for the Pidyon HaBen dedication ritual.[85][86]
- ^ "Fear a factor in surgical births". The Sydney Morning Herald. 2007-10-07. http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/fear-a-factor-in-surgical-births/2007/10/06/1191091421081.html.
- ^ "Kiwi caesarean rate continues to rise". Stuff.co.nz. 12 September 2007. http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/4198257a11.html. Retrieved 22 September 2011.
- ^ Finger, C. (2003). "Caesarean section rates skyrocket in Brazil. Many women are opting for Caesareans in the belief that it is a practical solution.". Lancet 362 (9384): 628. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14204-3. PMID 12947949.
- ^ "C-section rates around globe at ‘epidemic’ levels". AP / msnbc.com. Jan. 12, 2010. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34826186/. Retrieved February 21, 2010.
- ^ http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_12.pdf
- ^ .http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15840743
- ^ a b Caesarean section?: etymology and early history South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, August, 2009 by Pieter W.J. van Dongen
- ^ "As there was a cultural taboo against burying an undelivered woman in Roman and German societies, according to Lex Caesarea..." U Högberg, E Iregren, CH Siven, "Maternal deaths in medieval sweden: an osteological and life table analysis", Journal of Biosocial Science, 1987, 19: 495–503 Cambridge University Press
- ^ a b University of Virginia Health System, Claude Moore Sciences Health Library, Ancient Gynecology: Caesarean Section
- ^ "Bad Medicine: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed," by Christopher Wanjek, p. 5 (John Wiley & Sons, 2003)
- ^ "...could not survive the trauma of a Caesarean" Oxford Classical Dictionary, Third Edition, "Childbirth"
- ^ "Cesarean Section – A Brief History: Part 1". US National Institutes of Health. 2009-06-25. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/cesarean/part1.html. Retrieved 2010-11-27.
- ^ "Caesarean section?: etymology and early history", South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, August, 2009 by Pieter W.J. van Dongen
- ^ For a summary (in German), of an article (also in German) that deals usefully with many of the relevant historical and linguistic questions raised here, go here [1].
- ^ Elsevier (2007). Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary (31st ed.). Philadelphia: Elsevier. ISBN 978-1-4160-2364-7
- ^ History of classical Sanskrit literature
- ^ Wilhelm Geiger (1908). The Dīpavaṃsa and Mahāvaṃsa and their historical development in Ceylon. H. C. Cottle, Government Printer, Ceylon. p. 40. OCLC 559688590.
- ^ a b Lurie, Samuel. "The changing motives of cesarean section: from the ancient world to the twenty-first century". Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Springer) 271 (4): 281–285. DOI:10.1007/s00404-005-0724-4.
- ^ WIKIPEDIA Rostam
- ^ Sima Qian. "楚世家 (House of Chu)" (in Chinese). Records of the Grand Historian. http://www.guoxue.com/shibu/24shi/shiji/sj_040.htm. Retrieved 3 December 2011.
- ^ "St. Raymond Nonnatus". Catholic Online. http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=314. Retrieved 2006-07-26.
- ^ Conner, Clifford D., A People's History Of Science : : Miners, Midwives, And "low Mechanicks", pg 3
- ^ Boss, J (1961). "THE ANTIQUITY OF CAESAREAN SECTION WITH MATERNAL SURVIVAL: THE JEWISH TRADITION". Medical history 5 (2): 117–31. PMC 1034600. PMID 16562221. //www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1034600.
- ^ a b "Cesarean Section – A Brief History: Part 2". U.S. National Institutes of Health. 2009-06-25. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/exhibition/cesarean/part2.html. Retrieved 2010-11-27.
- ^ "Woman's Ills". Time Magazine. 1951-06-18. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,815000,00.html. Retrieved 2009-04-01.
- ^ Shahbazi, A. Shapur. "RUDABA". Encyclopedia Iranica. http://www.iranica.com/newsite/index.isc?Article=http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/sup/Rudaba.html. Retrieved 2009-07-19.
- ^ TORPIN R, VAFAIE I.The birth of Rustam. An early account of cesarean section in Iran.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1961 Jan;81:185-9.
- ^ East L. Caesarean Birth: A positive approach to preparation and recovery. Tiskimo 2011, p11 http://www.csections.org/?p=41
- ^ East L. Caesarean Birth: A positive approach to preparation and recovery. Tiskimo 2011, p11 http://www.csections.org/?p=41
- ^ East L. Caesarean Birth: A positive approach to preparation and recovery. Tiskimo 2011, p11 http://www.csections.org/?p=41
- ^ East L. Caesarean Birth: A positive approach to preparation and recovery. Tiskimo 2011, p11 http://www.csections.org/?p=41
- ^ Turner R (1990). "Caesarean Section Rates, Reasons for Operations Vary Between Countries". Fam Plann Perspect. (Guttmacher Institute) 22 (6): 281–2. DOI:10.2307/2135690. JSTOR 2135690.
- ^ East L. Caesarean Birth: A positive approach to preparation and recovery. Tiskimo 2011, p11 http://www.csections.org/?p=41
- ^ a b Savage W (2007). "The rising Caesarean section rate: a loss of obstetric skill?". J Obstet Gynaecol 27 (4): 339–46. DOI:10.1080/01443610701337916. PMID 17654182.
- ^ Wei Ching T, Kanagalingam D, Hak Koon T (2003). "Rising Caesarean Section Rates–Where Do We Go From Here?". SGH Proceedings 12 (4): 208–12.
- ^ a b c Pai, Madhukar (2000). "Medical Interventions: Caesarean Sections as a Case Study". Economic and Political Weekly 35 (31): 2755–61.
- ^ "Caesarean Section". NHS Direct. http://www.nhsdirect.nhs.uk/articles/article.aspx?articleId=71§ionId=7681. Retrieved 2006-07-26. [dead link]
- ^ Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman M, Sauve R, Kramer MS (2007). "Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term". CMAJ 176 (4): 455–60. DOI:10.1503/cmaj.060870. PMC 1800583. PMID 17296957. //www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1800583.
- ^ "Why are Caesareans Done?". Gynaecworld. http://www.gynaecworld.com/Pregnancy/pg9.html#3. Retrieved 2006-07-26.
- ^ Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. (2006). "Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries". Obstet Gynecol 107 (6): 1226–32. DOI:10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84. PMID 16738145. (see also review by WebMD.com)
- ^ Kennare R, Tucker G, Heard A, Chan A (2007). "Risks of adverse outcomes in the next birth after a first cesarean delivery". Obstet Gynecol 109 (2 Pt 1): 270–6. DOI:10.1097/01.AOG.0000250469.23047.73. PMID 17267823.
- ^ G Cassady, (1971), "Effect of cesarean section on neonatal body water spaces", New England Journal of Medicine
- ^ Study: Early Repeat C-Sections Puts Babies At Risk. Npr.org (2009-01-08). Retrieved on 2011-07-26.
- ^ "High infant mortality rate seen with elective c-section," Reuters Health, September 2006. Medicineonline.com (2006-09-14). Retrieved on 2011-07-26.
- ^ http://www.institute.nhs.uk/quality_and_value/high_volume_care/focus_on:_caesarean_section.html
- ^ http://www.rcpi.ie/News/Pages/CaesareanSectionRates-MatrixMarch2011.aspx
- ^ http://www.canada.com/windsorstar/story.html?id=cd328013-086c-4ad7-a03d-6211b1cf1f2d
- ^ http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/to-push-or-not-to-push-its-a-womans-right-to-decide-20110101-19ch2.html
- ^ a b "La clinica dei record: 9 neonati su 10 nati con il parto cesareo". Corriere della Sera. January 14, 2009. http://www.corriere.it/cronache/09_gennaio_14/clinica_cesareo_margherita_de_bac_83de8688-e204-11dd-b227-00144f02aabc.shtml. Retrieved 2009-02-05. [dead link]
- ^ "Sagliocco denuncia boom di parti cesarei in Campania". Pupia informazione Campania. January 31, 2009. http://www.pupia.tv/campania/politica/3798/sagliocco-denuncia-boom-parti-cesarei-campania.html. Retrieved 2009-02-05. [dead link]
- ^ http://www.asplazio.it/asp_online/tut_soggetti_deb/files/files_cesareo/09/TC_tot08_09.pdf
- ^ "Cesarei, alla Mater Dei il record". TgCOM Mediaset www.tgcom.mediaset.it. January 14, 2009. http://www.tgcom.mediaset.it/cronaca/articoli/articolo438555.shtml=. Retrieved 2009-02-05. [dead link]
- ^ a b "Births: Preliminary Data for 2007". National Center for Health Statistics. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_12.pdf. Retrieved 2006-11-23.
- ^ Stephen Smith, "C-sections leap to 1 in 3 births in Bay State, to outstrip US", Boston Globe, February 14, 2008
- ^ "China's C-Section Rate Highest Worldwide, WHO Study Says,"Medical News Today, January 15, 2010>
- ^ Homer CS, Davis GK, Brodie PM, et al. (2001). "Collaboration in maternity care: a randomised controlled trial comparing community-based continuity of care with standard hospital care". BJOG 108 (1): 16–22. DOI:10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00022-X. PMID 11212998.
- ^ Hodnett ED; Hodnett, Ellen (2000). Hodnett, Ellen. ed. "Continuity of caregivers for care during pregnancy and childbirth". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2): CD000062. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000062. PMID 10796108.
Hodnett ED; Henderson, Sonja (2008). Henderson, Sonja. ed. "WITHDRAWN: Continuity of caregivers for care during pregnancy and childbirth". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4): CD000062. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD000062.pub2. PMID 18843605.
- ^ Goldstick O, Weissman A, Drugan A (2003). "The circadian rhythm of "urgent" operative deliveries". Isr Med Assoc J 5 (8): 564–6. PMID 12929294.
- ^ "Should there be a limit on Caesareans?". BBC News. 2010-06-30. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10448034.
- ^ NIH (2006). "State-of-the-Science Conference Statement. Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request". Obstet Gynecol 107 (6): 1386–97. DOI:10.1097/00006250-200606000-00027. PMID 16738168. http://consensus.nih.gov/2006/CesareanStatement_Final053106.pdf.
- ^ a b Campbell, Denis. “‘Fear of Pain’ causes a big rise in Caesareans.” 26 October 2008. The Guardian. Retrieved 27 October 2008.
- ^ Walsh, Joseph A. (2008). "Evolution and the Cesarean Section Rate". The American Biology Teacher 70 (7): 401–404. DOI:10.1662/0002-7685(2008)70[401:ETCSR]2.0.CO;2. ISSN 0002-7685.
- ^ MacKenzie IZ, Cooke I, Annan B (2003). "Indications for Caesarean section in a consultant obstetric unit over three decades". J Obstet Gynaecol 23 (3): 233–8. DOI:10.1080/0144361031000098316. PMID 12850849.
- ^ Cullinane M, Gray A, Hargraves C, Lansdown M, Martin I, Schubert M. Who operates when? – The 2003 Report of the Confidential Enquiry into Perioperative Deaths. http://www.ncepod.org.uk/pdf/2003/03full.pdf. Retrieved 2009-07-30.
- ^ Wagner, Marsden (registration required). Born in the USA: How a Broken Maternity System Must Be Fixed to Put Women and Children First. p. 42. ISBN 0-520-24596-2. http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0520245962.
- ^ Barley K, Aylin P, Bottle A, Jarman B (2004). "Social class and elective Caesareans in the English NHS". BMJ 328 (7453): 1399. DOI:10.1136/bmj.328.7453.1399. PMC 421774. PMID 15191977. //www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=421774.
- ^ Bewley S, Cockburn J. (2002). "The unfacts of 'request' Caesarean section". BCOG 109 (6): 597–605. DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.07106.x.
- ^ Usha Kiran TS, Jayawickrama NS (2002). "Who is responsible for the rising Caesarean section rate?". J Obstet Gynaecol 22 (4): 363–5. DOI:10.1080/01443610220141263. PMID 12521454.
- ^ Hildingsson I, Rådestad I, Rubertsson C, Waldenström U (2002). "Few women wish to be delivered by Caesarean section". BJOG 109 (6): 618–23. DOI:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01393.x. PMID 12118637.
- ^ Hawkins JL, Koonin LM, Palmer SK, Gibbs CP (1997). "Anesthesia-related deaths during obstetric delivery in the United States, 1979–1990". Anesthesiology 86 (2): 277–84. DOI:10.1097/00000542-199702000-00002. PMID 9054245.
- ^ a b Afolabi BB, Lesi FE, Merah NA (2006). Afolabi, Bosede B. ed. "Regional versus general anaesthesia for Caesarean section". Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4): CD004350. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD004350.pub2. PMID 17054201.
- ^ Bucklin BA, Hawkins JL, Anderson JR, Ullrich FA (2005). "Obstetric anesthesia workforce survey: twenty-year update". Anesthesiology 103 (3): 645–53. DOI:10.1097/00000542-200509000-00030. PMID 16129992.
- ^ http://www.healthindicators.gov/Indicators/Priorcesareanbirths_1134/Profile/Data
- ^ “Rates for Total Cesarean Section, Primary Cesarean Section and Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Section (VBAC), United States, 1989–2006.” Childbirth Connection, 2008. Retrieved 25 September 2008.
- ^ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8703167
- ^ a b http://consensus.nih.gov/2010/vbacstatement.htm
- ^ http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/vbacuptp.htm
- ^ http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/press_releases/nr07-21-10-1.cfm
- ^ a b http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/objectiveslist.aspx?topicId=26
- ^ American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). "Guideline on Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery". guideline.gov. http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?view_id=1&doc_id=6374. Retrieved 2008-02-09.
- ^ American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). "Guideline on Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery: Major Recommendations". guideline.gov. http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?view_id=1&doc_id=6374#s23. Retrieved 2008-02-09.
- ^ Zweifler J, Garza A, Hughes S, Stanich MA, Hierholzer A, Lau M (2006). "Vaginal birth after cesarean in California: before and after a change in guidelines". Ann Fam Med 4 (3): 228–34. DOI:10.1370/afm.544. PMC 1479438. PMID 16735524. //www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1479438.
- ^ Rita Rubin (2005-08-24). "Battle lines drawn over C-sections". USA Today. http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-08-23-csection-battle_x.htm. Retrieved 2008-02-09.
- ^ See Chok Yaakov 470:2; Kaf ha-Chayim 470:3; http://www.torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5758/pesach.html
- ^ http://judaism.about.com/od/lifeevents/g/pidyonhaben.htm
- ^ http://www.cohen-levi.org/the_cohens_heritage/pidyon_ha_ben.htm
