Download PDF
Am J Perinatol 2016; 33(10): 951-956
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1581054
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

The Relationship between Rostral Retraction of the Pannus and Outcomes at Cesarean Section

Ozhan M. Turan
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Joshua Rosenbloom
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Jessica L. Galey
2   Department of Anesthesiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Stephanie L. Kahntroff
2   Department of Anesthesiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Shobana Bharadwaj
2   Department of Anesthesiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Shafonya M. Turner
2   Department of Anesthesiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
,
Andrew M. Malinow
1   Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
2   Department of Anesthesiology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

29 October 2015

08 February 2016

Publication Date:
21 April 2016 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Maternal obesity presents several challenges at cesarean section. In an effort to routinely employ a transverse suprapubic skin incision, we often retract the pannus in a rostral direction using adhesive tape placed after induction of anesthesia and before surgical preparation of the skin. We sought to understand the association between taping and neonatal cord blood gases, Apgar scores, and time from skin incision to delivery of the neonate.

Study Design This is a retrospective study, performed using prospectively collected anesthesiology records with data supplemented from the patients' medical records. Singleton pregnancies with morbid obesity (body mass index [BMI] > 40 kg/m2) between 37 and 42 weeks of gestation who delivered via nonurgent, scheduled cesarean delivery under regional (spinal, combined spinal–epidural, or epidural) anesthesia between March 2007 and March 2013 were identified. Maternal demographics including BMI, comorbidities, type of anesthesia, time intervals during the surgery, cord gas results, and Apgar scores were collected. The relationship between taping and blood acid–base status, Apgar scores, and interval from skin incision to delivery was investigated using appropriate statistical tests.

Results There were 2,525 (27.5%) cesarean deliveries out of 9,189 total deliveries. Applying the described inclusion/exclusion criteria, 141 patients were identified (33 taped and 108 nontaped). There was no significant difference in BMI between the taped (51.9 kg/m2) and nontaped groups (47.4 kg/m2), p > 0.05. There was no difference in type of anesthesia (p > 0.05). The only significant difference between the taped and not-taped groups was the presence of chronic hypertension in the taped group (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences in cord blood gas values, Apgar scores, or skin incision to delivery interval (p > 0.05 for all outcomes).

Conclusions Taping of the pannus at cesarean section is a safe intervention that is not associated with adverse neonatal outcomes. Furthermore, over a set of parturients with BMI > 40 kg/m2, it does not hasten skin incision to delivery time.

Keywords

morbid obesity - retraction of pannus - cesarean delivery - neonatal outcome
 

  • References

  • 1 Sturm R, Hattori A. Morbid obesity rates continue to rise rapidly in the United States. Int J Obes 2013; 37 (6) 889-891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Mission JF, Marshall NE, Caughey AB. Pregnancy risks associated with obesity. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2015; 42 (2) 335-353
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Girsen AI, Osmundson SS, Naqvi M, Garabedian MJ, Lyell DJ. Body mass index and operative times at cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 124 (4) 684-689
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Ayres-de-Campos D. Obesity and the challenges of caesarean delivery: prevention and management of wound complications. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2015; 29 (3) 406-414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Brocato BE, Thorpe Jr EM, Gomez LM, Wan JY, Mari G. The effect of cesarean delivery skin incision approach in morbidly obese women on the rate of classical hysterotomy. J Pregnancy 2013; 2013: 890296
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Burstein E, Levy A, Mazor M, Wiznitzer A, Sheiner E. Pregnancy outcome among obese women: a prospective study. Am J Perinatol 2008; 25 (9) 561-566
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 McDonald SD, Han Z, Mulla S, Beyene J ; Knowledge Synthesis Group. Overweight and obesity in mothers and risk of preterm birth and low birth weight infants: systematic review and meta-analyses. BMJ 2010; 341: c3428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Yogev Y, Catalano PM. Pregnancy and obesity. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2009; 36 (2) 285-300 , viii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Joy S, Istwan N, Rhea D, Desch C, Stanziano G. The impact of maternal obesity on the incidence of adverse pregnancy outcomes in high-risk term pregnancies. Am J Perinatol 2009; 26 (5) 345-349
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Buhimschi CS, Buhimschi IA, Malinow AM, Weiner CP. Intrauterine pressure during the second stage of labor in obese women. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103 (2) 225-230
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Verdiales M, Pacheco C, Cohen WR. The effect of maternal obesity on the course of labor. J Perinat Med 2009; 37 (6) 651-655
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Jensen H, Agger AO, Rasmussen KL. The influence of prepregnancy body mass index on labor complications. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999; 78 (9) 799-802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Robinson H, Tkatch S, Mayes DC, Bott N, Okun N. Is maternal obesity a predictor of shoulder dystocia?. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101 (1) 24-27
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cedergren MI. Maternal morbid obesity and the risk of adverse pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103 (2) 219-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Sebastián Manzanares G, Angel Santalla H, Irene Vico Z, López Criado MS, Alicia Pineda L, José Luis Gallo V. Abnormal maternal body mass index and obstetric and neonatal outcome. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25 (3) 308-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Maisonneuve E, Audibert F, Guilbaud L , et al. Risk factors for severe neonatal acidosis. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 118 (4) 818-823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Westgate J, Garibaldi JM, Greene KR. Umbilical cord blood gas analysis at delivery: a time for quality data. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 101 (12) 1054-1063
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yeomans ER, Hauth JC, Gilstrap III LC, Strickland DM. Umbilical cord pH, PCO2, and bicarbonate following uncomplicated term vaginal deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151 (6) 798-800
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Helwig JT, Parer JT, Kilpatrick SJ, Laros Jr RK. Umbilical cord blood acid-base state: what is normal?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 174 (6) 1807-1812 , discussion 1812–1814
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Thorp JA, Sampson JE, Parisi VM, Creasy RK. Routine umbilical cord blood gas determinations?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 161 (3) 600-605
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193 (5) 1607-1617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Dahlke JD, Mendez-Figueroa H, Rouse DJ, Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based surgery for cesarean delivery: an updated systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (4) 294-306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Conner SN, Tuuli MG, Longman RE, Odibo AO, Macones GA, Cahill AG. Impact of obesity on incision-to-delivery interval and neonatal outcomes at cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (4) 386.e1-386.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Wall PD, Deucy EE, Glantz JC, Pressman EK. Vertical skin incisions and wound complications in the obese parturient. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102 (5, Pt 1) 952-956
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 McLean M, Hines R, Polinkovsky M, Stuebe A, Thorp J, Strauss R. Type of skin incision and wound complications in the obese parturient. Am J Perinatol 2012; 29 (4) 301-306
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Marrs CC, Moussa HN, Sibai BM, Blackwell SC. The relationship between primary cesarean delivery skin incision type and wound complications in women with morbid obesity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210 (4) 319.e1-319.e4
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Puttanavijarn L, Phupong V. Comparisons of the morbidity outcomes in repeated cesarean sections using midline and Pfannenstiel incisions. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2013; 39 (12) 1555-1559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar