Literature DB >> 8703167

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

M J McMahon1, E R Luther, W A Bowes, A F Olshan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to reduce the rate of cesarean section, obstetricians now offer a trial of labor to pregnant women who have had a previous cesarean section. Although a trial of labor is usually successful and is relatively safe, few studies have directly addressed the maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality associated with this method of delivery.
METHODS: We performed a population-based, longitudinal study of 6138 women in Nova Scotia who had previously undergone cesarean section and had delivered a singleton live infant in the period from 1986 through 1992.
RESULTS: A total of 3249 women elected a trial of labor, and 2889 women chose to undergo a second cesarean section. There were no maternal deaths. The overall rate of maternal morbidity was 8.1 percent; 1.3 percent had major complications (a need for hysterectomy, uterine rupture, or operative injury) and 6.9 percent had minor complications (puerperal fever, a need for blood transfusion, or abdominal-wound infection). Although the overall rate of maternal complications did not differ significantly between women who chose a trial of labor and the women who elected cesarean section (odds ratio for the trial-of-labor group, 0.9; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.1), major complications were nearly twice as likely among women undergoing a trial of labor (odds ratio, 1.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.1 to 3.0). Apgar scores, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, and perinatal mortality were similar among the infants whose mothers had a trial of labor and those whose mothers underwent elective cesarean section.
CONCLUSION: Among pregnant women who have had a cesarean section, major maternal complications are almost twice as likely among those whose deliveries are managed with a trial of labor as among those who undergo an elective second cesarean section.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8703167     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199609053351001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  73 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section.

Authors:  Jeanne-Marie Guise; Marian S McDonagh; Patricia Osterweil; Peggy Nygren; Benjamin K S Chan; Mark Helfand
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-07-03

2.  Planned elective cesarean section: a reasonable choice for some women?

Authors:  Mary E Hannah
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-03-02       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Mode of delivery after a previous cesarean birth, and associated maternal and neonatal morbidity.

Authors:  Carmen B Young; Shiliang Liu; Giulia M Muraca; Yasser Sabr; Tracy Pressey; Robert M Liston; K S Joseph
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-05-07       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  The UTAH VBAC Study.

Authors:  Greg Gochnour; Stephen Ratcliffe; Mary Bishop Stone
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2005-06

5.  Neonatal mortality risk for repeat cesarean compared to vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries in the United States, 1998-2002 birth cohorts.

Authors:  Fay Menacker; Marian F MacDorman; Eugene Declercq
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2010-03

Review 6.  Elective cesarean section: its impact on neonatal respiratory outcome.

Authors:  Ashwin Ramachandrappa; Lucky Jain
Journal:  Clin Perinatol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.430

7.  Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed.

Authors:  S Paterson-Brown
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-08-15

8.  Maternal and newborn outcomes after a prior cesarean birth by planned mode of delivery and history of prior vaginal birth in British Columbia: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Celeste D Bickford; Patricia A Janssen
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2015-04-02

9.  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

10.  Cesarean and VBAC rates among immigrant vs. native-born women: a retrospective observational study from Taiwan Cesarean delivery and VBAC among immigrant women in Taiwan.

Authors:  Jung-Chung Fu; Sudha Xirasagar; Jihong Liu; Janice C Probst
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-09-10       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.