Literature DB >> 22464069

Elective repeat cesarean delivery compared with spontaneous trial of labor after a prior cesarean delivery: a propensity score analysis.

Sharon A Gilbert1, William A Grobman, Mark B Landon, Catherine Y Spong, Dwight J Rouse, Kenneth J Leveno, Michael W Varner, Steve N Caritis, Paul J Meis, Yoram Sorokin, Marshall Carpenter, Mary J O'Sullivan, Baha M Sibai, John M Thorp, Susan M Ramin, Brian M Mercer.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine outcomes, after the use of propensity score techniques, to create balanced groups according to whether a woman undergoes elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD) or trial of labor (TOL). STUDY
DESIGN: Women who were eligible for a TOL with 1 previous low transverse incision were categorized according to whether they underwent an ERCD or TOL. A propensity score technique was used to develop ERCD and TOL groups with comparable baseline characteristics. Outcomes were assessed with conditional logistic regression.
RESULTS: The rates of endometritis, operative injury, respiratory distress syndrome, and newborn infant infection were lower and the rates of hysterectomy and wound complication were higher in the ERCD group.
CONCLUSION: Propensity score techniques can be used to generate comparable ERCD and TOL groups. Some types of maternal morbidity (such as hysterectomy) are higher; other types (such as operative injury) are lower in the ERCD group. Although the absolute risk is low, neonatal morbidity appears to be lower in the ERCD group.
Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22464069      PMCID: PMC3337034          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.02.002

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


  22 in total

1.  Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores.

Authors:  S T Normand; M B Landrum; E Guadagnoli; J Z Ayanian; T J Ryan; P D Cleary; B J McNeil
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Is vaginal birth after cesarean safe? Experience at a community hospital.

Authors:  H Blanchette; M Blanchette; J McCabe; S Vincent
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 3.  A critical appraisal of propensity-score matching in the medical literature between 1996 and 2003.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2008-05-30       Impact factor: 2.373

4.  Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group.

Authors:  R B D'Agostino
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1998-10-15       Impact factor: 2.373

5.  Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Mark B Landon; John C Hauth; Kenneth J Leveno; Catherine Y Spong; Sharon Leindecker; Michael W Varner; Atef H Moawad; Steve N Caritis; Margaret Harper; Ronald J Wapner; Yoram Sorokin; Menachem Miodovnik; Marshall Carpenter; Alan M Peaceman; Mary Jo O'Sullivan; Baha Sibai; Oded Langer; John M Thorp; Susan M Ramin; Brian M Mercer; Steven G Gabbe
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  ACOG Committee Opinion No. 342: induction of labor for vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section.

Authors:  M J McMahon; E R Luther; W A Bowes; A F Olshan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1996-09-05       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Can a prediction model for vaginal birth after cesarean also predict the probability of morbidity related to a trial of labor?

Authors:  William A Grobman; Yinglei Lai; Mark B Landon; Catherine Y Spong; Kenneth J Leveno; Dwight J Rouse; Michael W Varner; Atef H Moawad; Steve N Caritis; Margaret Harper; Ronald J Wapner; Yoram Sorokin; Menachem Miodovnik; Marshall Carpenter; Mary J O'Sullivan; Baha M Sibai; Oded Langer; John M Thorp; Susan M Ramin; Brian M Mercer
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Preventive services use among women seen by gynecologists, general medical physicians, or both.

Authors:  Beth G Lewis; Ethan A Halm; Sue M Marcus; Deborah Korenstein; Alex D Federman
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Risk of uterine rupture and adverse perinatal outcome at term after cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Catherine Y Spong; Mark B Landon; Sharon Gilbert; Dwight J Rouse; Kenneth J Leveno; Michael W Varner; Atef H Moawad; Hyagriv N Simhan; Margaret Harper; Ronald J Wapner; Yoram Sorokin; Menachem Miodovnik; Marshall Carpenter; Alan M Peaceman; Mary J O'Sullivan; Baha M Sibai; Oded Langer; John M Thorp; Susan M Ramin; Brian M Mercer
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  16 in total

Review 1.  Economic Evaluations Comparing a Trial of Labor with an Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Anna Joy Rogers; Nathaniel G Rogers; Meredith L Kilgore; Akila Subramaniam; Lorie M Harper
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2016-11-11       Impact factor: 5.725

2.  Cost-effectiveness of trial of labor after previous cesarean in a minimally biased cohort.

Authors:  Sharon A Gilbert; William A Grobman; Mark B Landon; Catherine Y Spong; Dwight J Rouse; Kenneth J Leveno; Michael W Varner; Ronald J Wapner; Yoram Sorokin; Mary J O'Sullivan; Baha M Sibai; John M Thorp; Susan M Ramin; Brian M Mercer
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Management of fetal malposition in the second stage of labor: a propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Abigail R Aiken; Catherine E Aiken; Medhat S Alberry; Jeremy C Brockelsby; James G Scott
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-10-18       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 4.  What We Have Learned About Trial of Labor After Cesarean Delivery from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Cesarean Registry.

Authors:  Mark B Landon; William A Grobman
Journal:  Semin Perinatol       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 3.300

5.  Neonatal complications in public and private patients: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kristjana Einarsdóttir; Sarah Stock; Fatima Haggar; Geoffrey Hammond; Amanda T Langridge; David B Preen; Nick De Klerk; Helen Leonard; Fiona J Stanley
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  Intrapartum and neonatal mortality among low-risk women in midwife-led versus obstetrician-led care in the Amsterdam region of the Netherlands: a propensity score matched study.

Authors:  Melanie M J Wiegerinck; Birgit Y van der Goes; Anita C J Ravelli; Joris A M van der Post; Fayette C D Buist; Pieter Tamminga; Ben W Mol
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Evaluation of Maternal-Neonatal Outcomes in Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery Referred to Maternity of Academic Hospitals.

Authors:  Masoumeh Mirteymouri; Sedigheh Ayati; Leyla Pourali; Mahboubeh Mahmoodinia; Maliheh Mahmoodinia
Journal:  J Family Reprod Health       Date:  2016-12

8.  Women's experiences of planning a vaginal birth after caesarean in different models of maternity care in Australia.

Authors:  Hazel Keedle; Lilian Peters; Virginia Schmied; Elaine Burns; Warren Keedle; Hannah Grace Dahlen
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Neonatal outcomes after preterm birth by mothers' health insurance status at birth: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kristjana Einarsdóttir; Fatima A Haggar; Amanda T Langridge; Anthony S Gunnell; Helen Leonard; Fiona J Stanley
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Cervical cancer precursors and hormonal contraceptive use in HIV-positive women: application of a causal model and semi-parametric estimation methods.

Authors:  Hannah H Leslie; Deborah A Karasek; Laura F Harris; Emily Chang; Naila Abdulrahim; May Maloba; Megan J Huchko
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.