Literature DB >> 16389006

Five years to the term breech trial: the rise and fall of a randomized controlled trial.

Marek Glezerman1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: On the basis of the end points of neonatal morbidity and death, the authors of the term breech trial concluded unequivocally that cesarean delivery was safer for breech babies. STUDY
DESIGN: Analysis of the original and new data gives rise to serious concerns as far as study design, methods, and conclusions are concerned. In a substantial number of cases, there was a lack of adherence to the inclusion criteria. There was a large interinstitutional variation of standard of care; inadequate methods of antepartum and intrapartum fetal assessment were used, and a large proportion of women were recruited during active labor. In many instances of planned vaginal delivery, there was no attendance of a clinician with adequate expertise.
RESULTS: Most cases of neonatal death and morbidity in the term breech trial cannot be attributed to the mode of delivery. Moreover, analysis of outcome after 2 years has shown no difference between vaginal and abdominal deliveries of breech babies.
CONCLUSION: The original term breech trial recommendations should be withdrawn.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16389006     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  23 in total

1.  Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term.

Authors:  Shiliang Liu; Robert M Liston; K S Joseph; Maureen Heaman; Reg Sauve; Michael S Kramer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2007-02-13       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Population trends in cesarean delivery for breech presentation in the United States, 1997-2003.

Authors:  Henry Chong Lee; Yasser Y El-Sayed; Jeffrey B Gould
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-03-04       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  Delivery in breech presentation: the decision making.

Authors:  Abha Singh; Nalini Mishra; Rajni Dewangan
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2012-10-16

4.  Management of breech presentation at term: a retrospective cohort study of 10 years of experience.

Authors:  J Burgos; L Rodríguez; P Cobos; C Osuna; M Del Mar Centeno; R Larrieta; T Martínez-Astorquiza; L Fernández-Llebrez
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 2.521

5.  Twin Birth Considering the Current Results of the "Twin Birth Study"

Authors:  B Seelbach-Goebel
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.915

6.  Breech presentation: a retrospective analysis of 12-years' experience at a single center.

Authors:  Mariella Mailàth-Pokorny; Oliver Preyer; Christian Dadak; Andreas Lischka; Martina Mittlböck; Peter Wagenbichler; Thomas Laml
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.704

Review 7.  What Are Optimal Cesarean Section Rates in the U.S. and How Do We Get There? A Review of Evidence-Based Recommendations and Interventions.

Authors:  Diana Montoya-Williams; Dominick J Lemas; Lisa Spiryda; Keval Patel; Josef Neu; Tiffany L Carson
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  Educational outcomes following breech delivery: a record-linkage study of 456947 children.

Authors:  Daniel F Mackay; Rachael Wood; Albert King; David N Clark; Sally-Ann Cooper; Gordon C S Smith; Jill P Pell
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 7.196

9.  Randomised controlled trials and clinical maternity care: moving on from intention-to-treat and other simplistic analyses of efficacy.

Authors:  A W Welsh
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  The incidence of caesarean sections in the university clinical center of kosovo.

Authors:  Brikene Elshani; Armond Daci; Sanije Gashi; Shefqet Lulaj
Journal:  Acta Inform Med       Date:  2012-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.