Cesarean Section and Subsequent Stillbirth, Is Confounding by Indication Responsible for the Apparent Association? An Updated Cohort Analysis of a Large Perinatal Database

Stephen Wood, Sue Ross and Reg Sauve

PLOS ONE, 2015, vol. 10, issue 9, 1-8

Abstract: Background: Several studies and a recent meta-analysis have suggested that previous Cesarean section may increase the risk of stillbirth in a subsequent pregnancy. Given the high rates of Cesarean section in contemporary obstetric practice, this is of considerable public health importance. We sought to evaluate the potential that this association is the result of residual confounding bias. Methods: A large perinatal database (Alberta Perinatal Health Project) was searched to identify a matched set of first and second births from the years 1992–2006. Data on pregnancy outcomes, demographics and potential confounding factors were obtained. Results: The cohort was comprised of 98538 matched first and second births. Multivariate analysis did not reveal an association between previous Cesarean section and stillbirth, OR = 1.38 (0.98, 1.93). Restricting the analysis to a low risk group further attenuated the association, OR = .99 (0.62, 1.52). Analysis of the risk by indication for Cesarean section found that the risk was not increased for previous dystocia, OR = .91 (0.53, 1.55) nor for breech presentation, OR = 1.06 (0.50, 2.28) but only for other indications including non reassuring fetal status and fetal distress, OR = 1.96 (1.29, 2.98). Conclusions: The results of our cohort analysis suggest that previous Cesarean section does not cause an increased risk of stillbirth.

Date: 2015
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0136272 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 36272&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0136272

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136272

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().