Prelabour Caesarean Section Following IVF/ICSI in Older-term Nulliparous Women: Too Precious to Push?

Overview

Journal J Pregnancy

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Gynecology & Obstetrics

Date 2011 Dec 2

PMID 22132336

Citations 12

Authors

E Gillet

E Martens

G Martens

H Cammu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To compare prelabour caesarean section (CS) rates in older nulliparous women with a term singleton baby in cephalic presentation conceiving spontaneously and through IVF/ICSI. When the latter women would ask for CS, how willing are gynaecologists to comply with that request?

Methods: A population-based retrospective (1995-2009) cohort study, conducted in Northern Belgium. A comparison of 1,866 nulliparous women pregnant after IVF/ICSI and 15,228 controls is made. An anonymous postal questionnaire is sent to all Belgian gynaecologists.

Result: Both groups are comparable with respect to maternal age, gestational age, and birth weight. Prelabour CS is more often performed in women who conceived through IVF/ICSI compared to those who conceived spontaneously (9.2% versus 6.3%, P < 0.001). One in five gynaecologists agrees with the maternal request.

Conclusion: IVF/ICSI pregnancies in older nulliparous women more often end in a prelabour CS and a substantial number of gynaecologists go along with a nonmedical reason for CS.

Citing Articles

Maternal and neonatal outcomes at delivery in nulliparous women with advanced maternal age.

Mforteh A, Kra-Friedman A, Karavani G, Hochler H, Lipschuetz M, Calderon-Margalit R BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025; 25(1):270.

PMID: 40069659 PMC: 11899165. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-025-07289-6.

How two-child policy affects cesarean section in women with advanced maternal age (AMA): using the Robson classification system.

Tang W, Zeng D, Wu W, Wu S, Ou Y, Huang Y BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024; 24(1):641.

PMID: 39363249 PMC: 11447987. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-024-06784-6.

Transition to motherhood following the use of assisted reproductive technologies: Experiences of women in Ghana.

Asante-Afari K, Doku D, Darteh E PLoS One. 2022; 17(4):e0266721.

PMID: 35452460 PMC: 9032403. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266721.

Association Between Pre-Pregnancy Body Mass Index and Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes of Singleton Pregnancies After Assisted Reproductive Technology.

Sun H, Liu Y, Huang S, Liu X, Li G, Du Q Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022; 12:825336.

PMID: 35095777 PMC: 8794644. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.825336.

The Kind of Conception Affects the Kind of Cesarean Delivery in Primiparous Women.

Antoniou E, Orovou E, Iliadou M, Sarella A, Palaska E, Rigas N Mater Sociomed. 2021; 33(3):188-194.

PMID: 34759776 PMC: 8565429. DOI: 10.5455/msm.2021.33.188-194.

References

Adler-Levy Y, Lunenfeld E, Levy A . Obstetric outcome of twin pregnancies conceived by in vitro fertilization and ovulation induction compared with those conceived spontaneously. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006; 133(2):173-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2006.08.010. View

Reubinoff B, Samueloff A, Ben-Haim M, Friedler S, Schenker J, Lewin A . Is the obstetric outcome of in vitro fertilized singleton gestations different from natural ones? A controlled study. Fertil Steril. 1997; 67(6):1077-83. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81442-2. View

Helmerhorst F, Perquin D, Donker D, Keirse M . Perinatal outcome of singletons and twins after assisted conception: a systematic review of controlled studies. BMJ. 2004; 328(7434):261. PMC: 324454. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.37957.560278.EE. View

Gerris J, De Sutter P, De Neubourg D, van Royen E, Vander Elst J, Mangelschots K . A real-life prospective health economic study of elective single embryo transfer versus two-embryo transfer in first IVF/ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19(4):917-23. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh188. View

Maman E, Lunenfeld E, Levy A, Vardi H, Potashnik G . Obstetric outcome of singleton pregnancies conceived by in vitro fertilization and ovulation induction compared with those conceived spontaneously. Fertil Steril. 1998; 70(2):240-5. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00160-5. View

Minkoff H, Berkowitz R . The myth of the precious baby. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 106(3):607-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000174585.08884.59. View

Miesnik S, Reale B . A review of issues surrounding medically elective cesarean delivery. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2007; 36(6):605-15. DOI: 10.1111/j.1552-6909.2007.00196.x. View

Tita A, Landon M, Spong C, Lai Y, Leveno K, Varner M . Timing of elective repeat cesarean delivery at term and neonatal outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360(2):111-20. PMC: 2811696. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0803267. View

Ilesanmi A, Fawole O, Olaleye D, Arowojolu A . Pregnancy outcome in the elderly primigravidae. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004; 18(1):40-3. DOI: 10.1080/01443619868253. View

10.

Gerris J . IVF and ICSI reimbursed in Belgium. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004; 21(5):135. DOI: 10.1023/b:jarg.0000031253.11076.c8. View

11.

Robson S, Tan W, Adeyemi A, Dear K . Estimating the rate of cesarean section by maternal request: anonymous survey of obstetricians in Australia. Birth. 2009; 36(3):208-12. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2009.00331.x. View

12.

Cammu H, Martens G, Keirse M . Mothers' level of education and childbirth interventions: A population-based study in Flanders, Northern Belgium. Birth. 2011; 38(3):191-9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2011.00476.x. View

13.

Bergholt T, Ostberg B, Legarth J, Weber T . Danish obstetricians' personal preference and general attitude to elective cesarean section on maternal request: a nation-wide postal survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004; 83(3):262-6. DOI: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.0312.x. View

14.

Coleman V, Lawrence H, Schulkin J . Rising cesarean delivery rates: the impact of cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2009; 64(2):115-9. DOI: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e3181932dda. View

15.

Jackson R, Gibson K, Wu Y, Croughan M . Perinatal outcomes in singletons following in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 103(3):551-63. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000114989.84822.51. View

16.

Bettes B, Coleman V, Zinberg S, Spong C, Portnoy B, DeVoto E . Cesarean delivery on maternal request: obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge, perception, and practice patterns. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109(1):57-66. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000249608.11864.b6. View

17.

McDonald S, Murphy K, Beyene J, Ohlsson A . Perinatal outcomes of in vitro fertilization twins: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 193(1):141-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.11.064. View

18.

Lampinen R, Vehvilainen-Julkunen K, Kankkunen P . A review of pregnancy in women over 35 years of age. Open Nurs J. 2009; 3:33-8. PMC: 2729989. DOI: 10.2174/1874434600903010033. View

19.

Menacker F, Declercq E, MacDorman M . Cesarean delivery: background, trends, and epidemiology. Semin Perinatol. 2006; 30(5):235-41. DOI: 10.1053/j.semperi.2006.07.002. View

20.

McCourt C, Weaver J, Statham H, Beake S, Gamble J, Creedy D . Elective cesarean section and decision making: a critical review of the literature. Birth. 2007; 34(1):65-79. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00147.x. View