{"title":"低风险妊娠的计划初次剖宫产与尝试分娩:与不良结局的关联","authors":"Claudia J Ibarra, Han-Yang Chen, Rachel Wiley, Hector Mendez-Figueroa, Suneet P Chauhan","doi":"10.1055/a-2650-1095","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare adverse outcomes among low-risk pregnancies with labor versus planned cesarean delivery (PL-CD).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A population-based, retrospective cohort study used U.S. vital statistic data from 2016-2021 in low-risk individuals delivered at 37 to 41 weeks with non-anomalous, singletons. Labor status was categorized as no labor (PL-CD) or labored. The primary outcome was a composite neonatal adverse outcome (CNAO); secondary outcomes were a composite maternal adverse outcome (CMAO) and infant death. Additional analysis was performed to re-categorize labor status into 3 groups: no labor (PL-CD), labored with vaginal delivery (VD) and labored with intrapartum cesarean (IN-CD). Multivariable Poisson regression models were utilized to estimate adjusted relative risk (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 22,685,620 live births during the study period, 13,686,776 (60.3%) were included: 6.0% had PL-CD, and 94.0% labored. The rate of CNAO and CMAO were 7.97 and 3.17 per 1,000 live births, respectively. Compared to PL-CD, the risk of CNAO (aRR 0.58; 95% CI 0.57-0.59), infant death (aRR 0.59; 95% CI 0.57-0.62) and CMAO were lower (aRR 0.62; 95% CI 0.60-0.64) among those that labored overall. Compared to PL-CD by route of delivery, the risk of CNAO (aRR 0.47; 95% CI 0.46-0.48) and CAMO (aRR 0.45; 95% CI 0.44-0.47) was lower among VD, but higher (CANO, aRR 1.24; 95% 1.21-1.26, CAMO aRR 1.75; 95% CI 1.69-1.81) if delivered by IN-CD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among low-risk pregnancies, those who labored had a lower risk of composite adverse outcomes compared to those with planned cesarean, particularly if delivered vaginally.</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Planned Primary Cesarean Delivery versus Attempted Labor in Low-Risk Pregnancies: Associations with Adverse Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Claudia J Ibarra, Han-Yang Chen, Rachel Wiley, Hector Mendez-Figueroa, Suneet P Chauhan\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2650-1095\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare adverse outcomes among low-risk pregnancies with labor versus planned cesarean delivery (PL-CD).</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>A population-based, retrospective cohort study used U.S. vital statistic data from 2016-2021 in low-risk individuals delivered at 37 to 41 weeks with non-anomalous, singletons. Labor status was categorized as no labor (PL-CD) or labored. The primary outcome was a composite neonatal adverse outcome (CNAO); secondary outcomes were a composite maternal adverse outcome (CMAO) and infant death. Additional analysis was performed to re-categorize labor status into 3 groups: no labor (PL-CD), labored with vaginal delivery (VD) and labored with intrapartum cesarean (IN-CD). Multivariable Poisson regression models were utilized to estimate adjusted relative risk (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 22,685,620 live births during the study period, 13,686,776 (60.3%) were included: 6.0% had PL-CD, and 94.0% labored. The rate of CNAO and CMAO were 7.97 and 3.17 per 1,000 live births, respectively. Compared to PL-CD, the risk of CNAO (aRR 0.58; 95% CI 0.57-0.59), infant death (aRR 0.59; 95% CI 0.57-0.62) and CMAO were lower (aRR 0.62; 95% CI 0.60-0.64) among those that labored overall. Compared to PL-CD by route of delivery, the risk of CNAO (aRR 0.47; 95% CI 0.46-0.48) and CAMO (aRR 0.45; 95% CI 0.44-0.47) was lower among VD, but higher (CANO, aRR 1.24; 95% 1.21-1.26, CAMO aRR 1.75; 95% CI 1.69-1.81) if delivered by IN-CD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Among low-risk pregnancies, those who labored had a lower risk of composite adverse outcomes compared to those with planned cesarean, particularly if delivered vaginally.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2650-1095\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2650-1095","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:比较低风险妊娠分娩与计划剖宫产(PL-CD)的不良结局。研究设计:一项基于人群的回顾性队列研究,使用了2016-2021年美国生命统计数据,研究对象为37至41周分娩的低风险个体,无异常单胎。劳动状态分为无劳动状态(PL-CD)和劳动状态。主要结局为新生儿综合不良结局(CNAO);次要结局是综合产妇不良结局(CMAO)和婴儿死亡。进一步的分析将分娩状态重新分类为3组:无分娩(PL-CD),阴道分娩(VD)和分娩时剖宫产(IN-CD)。多变量泊松回归模型用于估计校正相对风险(aRR)和95%置信区间(CI)。结果:在研究期间的22,685,620例活产中,包括13,686,776例(60.3%),其中6.0%为PL-CD, 94.0%为分娩。CNAO和CMAO的发生率分别为7.97 / 1000和3.17 / 1000。与PL-CD相比,CNAO的风险(aRR 0.58;95% CI 0.57-0.59),婴儿死亡(aRR 0.59;95% CI 0.57-0.62)和CMAO较低(aRR 0.62;95% CI 0.60-0.64)。与PL-CD相比,CNAO的风险(aRR 0.47;95% CI 0.46-0.48)和CAMO (aRR 0.45;95% CI 0.44-0.47) VD组较低,但较高(CANO, aRR 1.24;95% 1.21-1.26, CAMO aRR 1.75;95% CI 1.69-1.81)。结论:在低风险妊娠中,与计划剖宫产的孕妇相比,分娩的孕妇复合不良后果的风险较低,尤其是阴道分娩的孕妇。
Planned Primary Cesarean Delivery versus Attempted Labor in Low-Risk Pregnancies: Associations with Adverse Outcomes.
Objectives: To compare adverse outcomes among low-risk pregnancies with labor versus planned cesarean delivery (PL-CD).
Study design: A population-based, retrospective cohort study used U.S. vital statistic data from 2016-2021 in low-risk individuals delivered at 37 to 41 weeks with non-anomalous, singletons. Labor status was categorized as no labor (PL-CD) or labored. The primary outcome was a composite neonatal adverse outcome (CNAO); secondary outcomes were a composite maternal adverse outcome (CMAO) and infant death. Additional analysis was performed to re-categorize labor status into 3 groups: no labor (PL-CD), labored with vaginal delivery (VD) and labored with intrapartum cesarean (IN-CD). Multivariable Poisson regression models were utilized to estimate adjusted relative risk (aRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
Results: Among 22,685,620 live births during the study period, 13,686,776 (60.3%) were included: 6.0% had PL-CD, and 94.0% labored. The rate of CNAO and CMAO were 7.97 and 3.17 per 1,000 live births, respectively. Compared to PL-CD, the risk of CNAO (aRR 0.58; 95% CI 0.57-0.59), infant death (aRR 0.59; 95% CI 0.57-0.62) and CMAO were lower (aRR 0.62; 95% CI 0.60-0.64) among those that labored overall. Compared to PL-CD by route of delivery, the risk of CNAO (aRR 0.47; 95% CI 0.46-0.48) and CAMO (aRR 0.45; 95% CI 0.44-0.47) was lower among VD, but higher (CANO, aRR 1.24; 95% 1.21-1.26, CAMO aRR 1.75; 95% CI 1.69-1.81) if delivered by IN-CD.
Conclusions: Among low-risk pregnancies, those who labored had a lower risk of composite adverse outcomes compared to those with planned cesarean, particularly if delivered vaginally.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields.
The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field.
All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication.
The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.