Literature DB >> 26827159

Techniques for assisting difficult delivery at caesarean section.

Heather Waterfall1, Rosalie M Grivell, Jodie M Dodd.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Caesarean section involves making an incision in the woman's abdomen and cutting through the uterine muscle. The baby is then delivered through that incision. Difficult caesarean birth may result in injury for the infant or complications for the mother. Methods to assist with delivery include vacuum or forceps extraction or manual delivery utilising fundal pressure. Medication that relaxes the uterus (tocolytic medication) may facilitate the birth of the baby at caesarean section. Delivery of the impacted head after prolonged obstructed labour can be associated with significant maternal and neonatal complication; to facilitate delivery of the head the surgeon may utilise either reverse breech extraction or head pushing.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the use of tocolysis (routine or selective use) with no use of tocolysis or placebo and to compare different extraction methods at the time of caesarean section for outcomes of infant birth trauma, maternal complications (particularly postpartum haemorrhage requiring blood transfusion), and long-term measures of infant and childhood morbidity. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: All published, unpublished, and ongoing randomised controlled trials comparing the use of tocolytic agents (routine or selective) at caesarean section versus no use of tocolytic or placebo at caesarean section to facilitate the birth of the baby. Use of instrument versus manual delivery to facilitate birth of the baby. Reverse breech extraction versus head pushing to facilitate delivery of the deeply impacted fetal head. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. MAIN
RESULTS: Seven randomised controlled trials, involving 582 women undergoing caesarean section were included in this review. The risk of bias of included trials was variable, with some trials not adequately describing allocation or randomisation.Three comparisons were included. 1. Tocolysis versus no tocolysisA single randomised trial involving 97 women was identified and included in the review. Birth trauma was not reported. There were no cases of any maternal side-effect reported in either the nitroglycerin or the placebo group. No other maternal and infant health outcomes were reported. 2. Reverse breech extraction versus head push for the deeply impacted head at full dilation at caesarean section Four randomised trials involving 357 women were identified and included in the review. The primary outcome of birth trauma was reported by three trials and there was no difference between reverse breech extraction and head push for this rare outcome (three studies, 239 women, risk ratio (RR) 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 5.73). Secondary outcomes including endometritis rate (three studies, 285 women, average RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.05, Tau I² = 0.22, I² = 56%), extension of uterine incision (four studies, 357 women, average RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.40), mean blood loss (three studies, 298 women, mean difference (MD) -294.92, 95% CI -493.25 to -96.59; I² = 98%) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)/special care nursery (SCN) admission (two studies, 226 babies, average RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.22, Tau I² = 0.27, I² = 74%) were decreased with reverse breech extraction. No differences were observed between groups for many of the other secondary outcomes reported (blood loss > 500 mL; blood transfusion; wound infection; mean hospital stay; average Apgar score).There was significant heterogeneity between the trials for the outcomes mean blood loss, operative time and mean hospital stay, making comparison difficult. However the operation duration was significantly shorter for reverse breech extraction, which may correspond with ease of delivery and therefore, the amount of tissue trauma and therefore, significantly less blood loss. Given the heterogeneity, we cannot define the amount of difference in blood loss, operative time or hospital stay however. 3. Instrument (vacuum or forceps) versus manual extraction at elective caesarean section Two randomised trials involving 128 women were identified and included in the review. Only one trial reported maternal and infant health outcomes as prespecified in this review. This trial reported birth trauma as an outcome but there were no instances of birth trauma in either comparison group. There were no differences found in mean fall in haemoglobin (Hb) between groups (one study, 44 women, MD 0.03, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.59), or in uterine incision extension (one study, 44 women, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.13 to 3.73). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: There is currently insufficient information available from randomised trials to support or refute the routine or selective use of tocolytic agents or instrument to facilitate infant birth at the time of difficult caesarean section. There is limited evidence that reverse breech extraction may improve maternal and fetal outcomes, though there was no difference in primary outcome of infant birth trauma. Further randomised controlled trials are needed to answer these questions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26827159      PMCID: PMC8676064          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004944.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  40 in total

1.  Comparison of "push" and "pull" methods for impacted fetal head extraction during cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Firoozeh Veisi; Maryam Zangeneh; Shohreh Malekkhosravi; Negin Rezavand
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2012-04-27       Impact factor: 3.561

2.  Disengagement of the deeply engaged fetal head during cesarean section in advanced labor: conventional method versus reverse breech extraction.

Authors:  Seema Chopra; Rashmi Bagga; Anish Keepanasseril; Vanita Jain; Jasvinder Kalra; Vanita Suri
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.636

3.  Breech extraction--an alternative method of delivering a deeply engaged head at cesarean section.

Authors:  Y F Fong; S Arulkumaran
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 3.561

Review 4.  Tocolytics for preterm labor: a systematic review.

Authors:  K Gyetvai; M E Hannah; E D Hodnett; A Ohlsson
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Instrumental delivery of the fetal head at the time of elective repeat cesarean: a randomized pilot study.

Authors:  J A Bofill; S G Lencki; S Barhan; L C Ezenagu
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.862

6.  Comparison of neonatal and maternal outcomes associated with head-pushing and head-pulling methods for impacted fetal head extraction during cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Parvin Bastani; Shabnam Pourabolghasem; Shabnam Pourabolghase; Fatemeh Abbasalizadeh; Leila Motvalli
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 3.561

7.  Nitroglycerin application during cesarean delivery: plasma levels, fetal/maternal ratio of nitroglycerin, and effects in newborns.

Authors:  M David; M M Walka; B Schmid; P Sinha; S Veit; W Lichtenegger
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Effect of fundal pressure on maternal to fetal microtransfusion at the time of cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Michelle Owens; Amanpreet Bhullar; Stephen J Carlan; William F O'Brien; Kazuyuki Hirano
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.730

9.  Acute tocolysis for fetal distress: terbutaline versus magnesium sulphate.

Authors:  E F Magann; R S Cleveland; J R Dockery; S P Chauhan; J N Martin; J C Morrison
Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 2.100

10.  [The harmful effects of beta2-sympathomimetic drugs as uterine relaxants on caesarean section (author's transl)].

Authors:  S Kaukinen; L Kaukinen
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  1978-08       Impact factor: 1.041

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Difficult Deliveries in Cesarean Section.

Authors:  Sujata A Dalvi
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2017-10-07

2.  Unintended hysterotomy extension during caesarean delivery: risk factors and maternal morbidity.

Authors:  Lauren E Giugale; Sara Sakamoto; Jonathan Yabes; Shannon L Dunn; Elizabeth E Krans
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2018-03-22       Impact factor: 1.246

3.  Cesarean in the second stage: a possible risk factor for subsequent spontaneous preterm birth.

Authors:  Vincenzo Berghella; Alexis C Gimovsky; Lisa D Levine; Joy Vink
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 4.  Vacuum-assisted cesarean section.

Authors:  Ross W McQuivey; Jon E Block
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2017-03-07

5.  The acceptability to women of techniques for managing an impacted fetal head at caesarean section and of randomised trials evaluating those techniques: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Gabriella Romano; Eleanor Mitchell; Rachel Plachcinski; Natalie Wakefield; Kate Walker; Susan Ayers
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2021-02-02       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  The Health Impact of Surgical Techniques and Assistive Methods Used in Cesarean Deliveries: A Systemic Review.

Authors:  Li-Hsuan Wang; Kok-Min Seow; Li-Ru Chen; Kuo-Hu Chen
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-09-21       Impact factor: 3.390

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.