American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 203, Issue 3 , Pages 271.e1-271.e7, September 2010

Complications of cesarean delivery in the massively obese parturient

Presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Chicago, IL, Feb. 2-6, 2010.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC

Received 2 March 2010; received in revised form 7 May 2010; accepted 17 June 2010. published online 05 August 2010.

Objective

The objective of the study was to determine predictors of cesarean delivery morbidity associated with massive obesity.

Study Design

This was an institutional review board–approved retrospective study of massively obese women (body mass index, ≥50 kg/m2) undergoing cesarean delivery. Bivariable and multivariable analyses were used to assess the strength of association between wound complication and various predictors.

Results

Fifty-eight of 194 patients (30%) had a wound complication. Most (90%) were wound disruptions, and 86% were diagnosed after hospital discharge (median postoperative day, 8.5; interquartile range, 6–12). Subcutaneous drains and smoking, but not labor or ruptured membranes, were independently associated with wound complication after controlling for various confounders. Vertical abdominal incisions were associated with increased operative time, blood loss, and vertical hysterotomy.

Conclusion

Women with a body mass index ≥50 kg/m2 have a much greater risk for cesarean wound complications than previously reported. Avoidance of subcutaneous drains and increased use of transverse abdominal wall incisions should be considered in massively obese parturients to reduce operative morbidity.

Key words: cesarean delivery, obesity, superobesity, wound complication, wound infection

 

 Reprints not available from the authors.

 Cite this article as: Alanis MC, Villers MS, Law TL, et al. Complications of cesarean delivery in the massively obese parturient. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:271.e1-7.

PII: S0002-9378(10)00824-0

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.06.049

American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 203, Issue 3 , Pages 271.e1-271.e7, September 2010