Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of planned vaginal versus planned caesarean delivery in a cohort of extremely obese women (body mass index ≥ 50 kg/m(2)). DESIGN: A national cohort study using the UK Obstetric Surveillance System (UKOSS). SETTING: All hospitals with consultant-led maternity units in the UK. POPULATION: Five hundred and ninety-one extremely obese women delivering in the UK between September 2007 and August 2008. METHODS: Prospective cohort identification through UKOSS routine monthly mailings. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anaesthetic, postnatal and neonatal complication rates. RESULTS: After adjustment, there were no significant differences in anaesthetic, postnatal or neonatal complications between women with planned vaginal delivery and planned caesarean delivery, with the exception of shoulder dystocia (3% versus 0%, P = 0.019). There were no significant differences in any outcomes in the subgroup of women who had no identified medical or antenatal complications. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not provide evidence to support a routine policy of caesarean delivery for extremely obese women on the basis of concern about higher rates of delivery complications, but does support a policy of individualised decision-making on the mode of delivery based on a thorough assessment of potential risk factors for poor delivery outcomes.

Original publication

DOI

10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02832.x

Type

Journal article

Journal

BJOG

Publication Date

03/2011

Volume

118

Pages

480 - 487

Keywords

Adult, Cesarean Section, Delivery, Obstetric, Female, Humans, Obesity, Patient Care Planning, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Pregnancy Outcome, Prenatal Care, Prospective Studies