Do pregnant women prefer timing of elective cesarean section prior to versus after 39 weeks of gestation? Secondary analyses from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate women's preferences for timing of elective cesarean section (ECS) scheduled prior to versus after 39 completed weeks. METHODS: Secondary analyses from a randomized controlled open-label trial were conducted at seven Danish tertiary hospitals from March 2009 to June 2011 with inclusion of singleton pregnant women with a healthy fetus. The women were allocated by a computerized telephone system to ECS scheduled at 38(+3) weeks or 39(+3) weeks of gestation. Dissatisfaction with timing of ECS and preferred timing of the procedure in a proposed future ECS delivery were evaluated. Data analyses were done by intention-to-treat, using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1196 women (94%) completed an online questionnaire at follow-up eight weeks postpartum. In the 38 weeks group, 61 (10%) women 601 were dissatisfied with the timing of their ECS, whereas in the 39 weeks group 157 (26%) of 595 were dissatisfied (adjOR 3.18, 95% CI 2.30; 4.40). The proportion of women who preferred the same timing in a future ECS were 272 (45%) in the 38 weeks group compared to 232 (39%) in the 39(+3) weeks group (adjOR 0.75, 95% CI 0.60; 0.95). CONCLUSIONS: The women in this trial preferred ECS scheduled prior to 39 weeks of gestation.

Elective caesarean section at 38 weeks versus 39 weeks: neonatal and maternal outcomes in a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether elective caesarean section before 39 completed weeks of gestation increases the risk of adverse neonatal or maternal outcomes. DESIGN: Randomised controlled multicentre open-label trial. SETTING: Seven Danish tertiary hospitals from March 2009 to June 2011. POPULATION: Women with uncomplicated pregnancies, a single fetus, and a date of delivery estimated by ultrasound scheduled for delivery by elective caesarean section. METHODS: Perinatal outcomes after elective caesarean section scheduled at a gestational age of 38 weeks and 3 days versus 39 weeks and 3 days (in both groups ±2 days). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission within 48 hours of birth. Secondary outcomes were neonatal depression, NICU admission within 7 days, NICU length of stay, neonatal treatment, and maternal surgical or postpartum adverse events. RESULTS: Among women scheduled for elective caesarean section at 38⁺³ weeks 88/635 neonates (13.9%) were admitted to the NICU, whereas in the 39⁺³ weeks group 76/637 neonates (11.9%) were admitted (relative risk [RR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.65-1.15). Neonatal treatment with continuous oxygen for more than 1 day (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.10-0.94) and maternal bleeding of more than 500 ml (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.63-0.99) were less frequent in the 39 weeks group, but these findings were insignificant after adjustment for multiple comparisons. The risk of adverse neonatal or maternal outcomes, or a maternal composite outcome (RR 1.1; 95% CI 0.79-1.53) was similar in the two intervention groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study found no significant reduction in neonatal admission rate after ECS scheduled at 39 weeks compared with 38 weeks of gestation.