|
|
||||||||
ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
From the Spital Limmattal, Schlieren, and Kantonsspital Münsterlingen, Münsterlingen, Switzerland.
Address reprint requests to: J. Christoph Rageth, MD, Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Spital Limmattal, Urdorferstr. 100, 8952 Schlieren, Switzerland, E-mail: ragethc{at}limmisp.zh.ch
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.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. K. Daltveit, M. C. Tollanes, H. Pihlstrom, and L. M. Irgens Cesarean Delivery and Subsequent Pregnancies Obstet. Gynecol., June 1, 2008; 111(6): 1327 - 1334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Ball and K. Hinshaw The current management of vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), April 1, 2007; 9(2): 77 - 82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. A. Grobman, S. Gilbert, M. B. Landon, C. Y. Spong, K. J. Leveno, D. J. Rouse, M. W. Varner, A. H. Moawad, S. N. Caritis, M. Harper, et al. Outcomes of Induction of Labor After One Prior Cesarean Obstet. Gynecol., February 1, 2007; 109(2): 262 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Lieberman, E. K. Ernst, J. P. Rooks, S. Stapleton, and B. Flamm Results of the National Study of Vaginal Birth After Cesarean in Birth Centers: Reply Obstet. Gynecol., April 1, 2005; 105(4): 898 - 899. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. R Patel, T. J Peters, D. J Murphy, and the ALSPAC Study Team Prenatal risk factors for Caesarean section. Analyses of the ALSPAC cohort of 12 944 women in England Int. J. Epidemiol., April 1, 2005; 34(2): 353 - 367. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. B. Landon, J. C. Hauth, K. J. Leveno, C. Y. Spong, S. Leindecker, M. W. Varner, A. H. Moawad, S. N. Caritis, M. Harper, R. J. Wapner, et al. Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes Associated with a Trial of Labor after Prior Cesarean Delivery N. Engl. J. Med., December 16, 2004; 351(25): 2581 - 2589. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Lieberman, E. K. Ernst, J. P. Rooks, S. Stapleton, and B. Flamm Results of the National Study of Vaginal Birth After Cesarean in Birth Centers Obstet. Gynecol., November 1, 2004; 104(5): 933 - 942. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. C S Smith, J. P Pell, D. Pasupathy, and R. Dobbie Factors predisposing to perinatal death related to uterine rupture during attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section: retrospective cohort study BMJ, August 14, 2004; 329(7462): 375. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. E. Kieser and T. F. Baskett A 10-Year Population-Based Study of Uterine Rupture Obstet. Gynecol., October 1, 2002; 100(4): 749 - 753. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. C. S. Smith, J. P. Pell, A. D. Cameron, and R. Dobbie Risk of Perinatal Death Associated With Labor After Previous Cesarean Delivery in Uncomplicated Term Pregnancies JAMA, May 22, 2002; 287(20): 2684 - 2690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Lydon-Rochelle, V. L. Holt, T. R. Easterling, and D. P. Martin Risk of Uterine Rupture during Labor among Women with a Prior Cesarean Delivery N. Engl. J. Med., July 5, 2001; 345(1): 3 - 8. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. F. Greene Vaginal Delivery after Cesarean Section -- Is the Risk Acceptable? N. Engl. J. Med., July 5, 2001; 345(1): 54 - 55. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. CHUNG, A. MACARIO, Y. Y. EL-SAYED, E. T. RILEY, B. DUNCAN, and M. L. DRUZIN Cost-Effectiveness of a Trial of Labor After Previous Cesarean Obstet. Gynecol., June 1, 2001; 97(6): 932 - 941. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. LYDON-ROCHELLE, V. L. HOLT, T. R. EASTERLING, and D. P. MARTIN First-Birth Cesarean and Placental Abruption or Previa at Second Birth Obstet. Gynecol., May 1, 2001; 97(5): 765 - 769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. J. Ridgeway, D. L. Weyrich, and T. J. Benedetti Fetal Heart Rate Changes Associated With Uterine Rupture Obstet. Gynecol., January 1, 1997; 103(3): 506 - 512. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |