Literature DB >> 10074973

Delivery after previous cesarean: a risk evaluation. Swiss Working Group of Obstetric and Gynecologic Institutions.

J C Rageth1, C Juzi, H Grossenbacher.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the risks of vaginal delivery after previous cesarean and to find criteria to help decide whether a trial of labor or an elective repeat cesarean should be preferred.
METHODS: We evaluated 29,046 deliveries after previous cesarean registered in a pooled database of 457,825 deliveries used to assess quality control in gynecology and obstetrics departments in Switzerland.
RESULTS: Among the 17,613 trial-of-labor cases logged (attempt rate 60.64%), the success rate was 73.73% (65.56% after inducing labor and 75.06% after the spontaneous onset of labor). The following complications were significantly more frequent in the previous-cesarean group: maternal febrile episodes (relative risk [RR] 2.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.52, 3.05), thromboembolic events (RR 2.81; CI 2.23, 3.55), bleeding due to placenta previa during pregnancy (RR 2.06; CI 1.70, 2.49), uterine rupture (92 cases; RR 42.18; CI 31.09, 57.24), and perinatal mortality (118 cases, including six associated with uterine rupture; RR 1.33; CI 1.10, 1.62). The postcesarean group also showed a 0.28% rate of peripartum hysterectomy (81 cases; RR 6.07; CI 4.71, 7.83). There was one maternal death in the group, compared with 14 maternal deaths in the group without previous cesarean (no statistical significance). The risk of uterine rupture for patients with previous cesareans was elevated in the trial-of-labor group compared with the group without trial of labor (RR 2.07; CI 1.29, 3.30), but all other maternal risks, including peripartum hysterectomy (RR 0.36; CI 0.23, 0.56), were lower. When comparing the women having a trial of labor, the 70 with uterine rupture more often had induced labor (24.29% compared with 13.92% in the nonrupture group; P = .013), had epidural anesthesia (24.29% compared with 8.44%; P < .001), had an abnormal fetal heart rate tracing (32.86% compared with 8.53%; P < .001), and had failure to progress (21.43% compared with 7.98%; P = .001).
CONCLUSION: A history of cesarean delivery significantly elevates the risks for mother and child in future deliveries. Nonetheless, a trial of labor after previous cesarean is safe. Induction of labor, epidural anesthesia, failure to progress, and abnormal fetal heart rate pattern are all associated with failure of a trial of labor and uterine rupture.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10074973     DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00446-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  13 in total

1.  Identifying barriers and facilitators towards implementing guidelines to reduce caesarean section rates in Quebec.

Authors:  Nils Chaillet; Eric Dubé; Marylène Dugas; Diane Francoeur; Johanne Dubé; Sonia Gagnon; Lucie Poitras; Alexandre Dumont
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Rates and success rates of trial of labor after cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990-2009.

Authors:  Sayeedha F G Uddin; Alan E Simon
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2013-09

3.  Labour and Childbirth After Previous Caesarean Section: Recommendations of the Austrian Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (OEGGG).

Authors:  P Reif; C Brezinka; T Fischer; P Husslein; U Lang; A Ramoni; H Zeisler; P Klaritsch
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.915

4.  Obstetric and non-obstetric risk factors for cesarean section in oman.

Authors:  Ibrahim Al Busaidi; Yahya Al-Farsi; Shyam Ganguly; Vaidyanathan Gowri
Journal:  Oman Med J       Date:  2012-11

Review 5.  A benefit-risk assessment of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction.

Authors:  Deborah A Wing
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 5.606

6.  Factors predisposing to perinatal death related to uterine rupture during attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section: retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Gordon C S Smith; Jill P Pell; Dharmintra Pasupathy; Richard Dobbie
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-07-19

7.  Induction of labor at second delivery subsequent to a primary cesarean: is stage of labor at previous cesarean a factor?

Authors:  Donna Amitai; Reut Rotem; Misgav Rottenstreich; Maayan Bas-Lando; Arnon Samueloff; Sorina Grisaru-Granovsky; Orna Reichman
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 2.344

8.  Risk of placenta previa in second birth after first birth cesarean section: a population-based study and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ipek Gurol-Urganci; David A Cromwell; Leroy C Edozien; Gordon C S Smith; Chidimma Onwere; Tahir A Mahmood; Allan Templeton; Jan H van der Meulen
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Evaluating trial of scar in patients with a history of caesarean section.

Authors:  Aliya Islam; Ambreen Ehsan; Saadia Arif; Javeria Murtaza; Ayesha Hanif
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2011-04

10.  Frequency, risk factors and feto-maternal outcomes of abruptio placentae in Northern Tanzania: a registry-based retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Godwin S Macheku; Rune Nathaniel Philemon; Olola Oneko; Pendo S Mlay; Gileard Masenga; Joseph Obure; Michael Johnson Mahande
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 3.007

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.