TEMPORAL TRENDS İN CESAREAN SECTİON INDİCATİONS İN A TERTİARY REFERRAL CENTER İN TÜRKİYE: A FİVE-YEAR RETROSPECTİVE STUDY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51271/jashso.85Keywords:
Sezaryen, Fetal distres, Sezaryen sonrası vajinal doğum, Üçüncü basamak sağlık kuruluşlarıAbstract
ABSTRACT
Aim: The rise in cesarean section (CS) rates has become a significant public health concern around the world. In this study, we aimed to determine the prevalence of cesarean deliveries over five years at a tertiary care center in Turkey and to identify trends and patterns in primary indications. Materials and Methods: This retrospective, single-center study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of a tertiary-level university hospital in Istanbul. The medical records of 18-42-year-old women who gave birth via cesarean section between January 1, 2020, and January 1, 2025, were examined. The demographic characteristics, medical history, and surgical indications were analyzed. Results: A total of 12,364 births occurred during the study period, and the overall C-section rate was 51.8% (n=6,400). Previous C-section was the most common indication (56.6%), followed by fetal distress (28.0%). While the repeat cesarean section rate gradually decreased from 2023 to 2025 (from 56.9% to 51.4%), the rate of cesarean sections indicated by fetal distress showed a significant trend of increase, from 24.3% in 2020 to 32.2% in 2025 (p=0.001). The newborn intensive care unit (NICU) admission rate was 19.4%. Conclusion: The study primarily identified a high overall cesarean section rate due to repeat cesarean sections and fetal distress. The growing trend in indications for fetal distress and the prevalence of repeat cesarean sections highlight the need for standardized diagnostic criteria regarding fetal risk and the development of strategies to support vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) in eligible patients.
References
1. Angolile CM, Max BL, Mushemba J, et al. Global increased cesarean section rates and public health implications: a call to action. Health Sci Rep. 2023;6(5):e1274. doi:10.1002/hsr2.1274
2. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, et al. The increasing trend in cesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990 2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148343
3. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, et al. Trends and projections of cesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(6):e005671. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671
4. Akadri AA, Imaralu JO, Salami OF, et al. Robson classification of caesarean births: implications for reducing caesarean section rate in a private tertiary hospital in Nigeria. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023;23:243. doi:10.1186/s12884-023-05557-x
5. Fineschi V, Arcangeli M, Di Fazio N, et al. Defensive medicine in the management of cesarean delivery: a survey among Italian physicians. Healthcare (Basel). 2021;9(9):1097. doi:10.3390/healthcare9091097
6. Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, et al. Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet. 2018;392(10155):1349-1357.
7. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(1):e73-e77. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5
8. World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean section rates: frequently asked
questions [Internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2015 [cited 2026 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-RHR-15.02
9. Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Liu NH, et al. Women's preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BJOG. 2011;118(4):391-399. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02793.x
10. Sung S, Mikes BA, Martingano DJ, et al. Cesarean delivery. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 [cited 2026 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK546707/
11. Guner G, Karabudak CB. Caesarean section rates and indications: a cross-sectional study from a tertiary care centre in Türkiye. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025;26(1):1. doi:10.1186/s12884-025-08494-z
12. Bulut AN, Ceyhan V. Cesarean rate and indications at a tertiary center. Erciyes Med J. 2022;44(1):39-43.
13. Eyi EGY, Mollamahmutoğlu L. An analysis of the high cesarean section rates in Türkiye by Robson classification. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021;34(16):2682-2692. doi:10.1080/14767058.2019.1670806
14. McCourt C, Weaver J, Statham H, et al. 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
15. Zahorowska A, Ciwiertnia A, Winter A, et al. Understanding caesarean section indications in Poland: trends and analysis. Ginekol Pol. 2025;96(8):670-677. doi:10.5603/gpl.101867
16. Chaurasia A, Shweta K, Khan A. Changing trends over 5 years in indications of caesarean section as per Robson's group classification in a tertiary care centre. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2023;12:2082-2087.
17. Amponsah-Tabi S, Ofori H, Boadu E, et al. Caesarean delivery: rate, indications and pregnancy outcome at Suntreso Government Hospital. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2025;14:4090-4097.
18. Khasawneh W, Obeidat N, Yusef D, et al. The impact of cesarean section on neonatal
outcomes at a university-based tertiary hospital in Jordan. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:335. doi:10.1186/s12884-020-03027-2
19. Masheer S, Ali A, Jiwani U, et al. Neonatal outcomes of elective caesarean section at term without prophylactic use of antenatal corticosteroids. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2023;10:2047-2053.
20. Finn D, O'Neill SM, Collins A, et al. Neonatal outcomes following elective caesarean delivery at term: a hospital-based cohort study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(6):904-910. doi:10.3109/14767058.2015.1023187
21. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(2):e110-e127.
22. Grivell RM, Alfirevic Z, Gyte GML, et al. Antenatal cardiotocography for fetal assessment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;9:CD007863. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007863.pub4
23. Mushinski D, Zahran S, Frazier A. Physician behaviour, malpractice risk and defensive medicine: an investigation of cesarean deliveries. Health Econ Policy Law. 2022;17(3):247-265. doi:10.1017/S1744133120000432
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Advanced Studies in Health Science and Obesity
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Journal of Advanced Studies in Health Science and Obesity (JASHSO) is licensed under the Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 International License.
This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, so long as attribution is given to the creator.
