open access

Vol 92, No 4 (2021)
Research paper
Published online: 2020-10-01
Get Citation

Comparison of maternal-neonatal results of vaginal birth after cesarean and elective repeat cesarean delivery

Gizem İzbudak1, Elif Tozkır1, Ebru Cogendez1, Faik Uzun1, Semra Kayataş Eser1
DOI: 10.5603/GP.a2020.0132
·
Pubmed: 33448006
·
Ginekol Pol 2021;92(4):306-311.
Affiliations
  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Health Sciences University, Zeynep Kamil Women’s and Children’s Diseases Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

open access

Vol 92, No 4 (2021)
ORIGINAL PAPERS Obstetrics
Published online: 2020-10-01

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate maternal-neonatal results in women who underwent vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) and elec-tive repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD).
Material and methods: In a two-year retrospective cohort analysis, 423 patients with a history of prior cesarean section, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation and gestational age of 37–41 weeks were investigated. The maternal and perinatal outcomes of 195 patients desiring VBAC and undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) attempt and 228 patients undergoing an ERCD were compared.
Results: While the TOLAC attempt was successful in 141 patients (72.3%), it was unsuccessful in 54 patients. No statistically significant difference was determined between VBAC and ERCD patients regarding uterine rupture, dehiscence, post-partum hemorrhage, the need for a blood transfusion and wound site infection (p > 0.05). When the post-partum neonatal outcomes were compared, there was no statistically significant difference between VBAC and ERCD groups regarding the prevalence of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), respiratory distress, sepsis and birth injury (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: The maternal and perinatal outcomes of our study may be encouraging in favor of VBAC particularly in countries with higher cesarean rates. We think that the option of VBAC should be offered more frequently for selected appropriate patients in created safe environments.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate maternal-neonatal results in women who underwent vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) and elec-tive repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD).
Material and methods: In a two-year retrospective cohort analysis, 423 patients with a history of prior cesarean section, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation and gestational age of 37–41 weeks were investigated. The maternal and perinatal outcomes of 195 patients desiring VBAC and undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) attempt and 228 patients undergoing an ERCD were compared.
Results: While the TOLAC attempt was successful in 141 patients (72.3%), it was unsuccessful in 54 patients. No statistically significant difference was determined between VBAC and ERCD patients regarding uterine rupture, dehiscence, post-partum hemorrhage, the need for a blood transfusion and wound site infection (p > 0.05). When the post-partum neonatal outcomes were compared, there was no statistically significant difference between VBAC and ERCD groups regarding the prevalence of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), respiratory distress, sepsis and birth injury (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: The maternal and perinatal outcomes of our study may be encouraging in favor of VBAC particularly in countries with higher cesarean rates. We think that the option of VBAC should be offered more frequently for selected appropriate patients in created safe environments.

Get Citation

Keywords

vaginal birth after cesarean; trial of labor after cesarean; maternal morbidity; maternal mortality; neonatal morbidity; neonatal mortality

About this article
Title

Comparison of maternal-neonatal results of vaginal birth after cesarean and elective repeat cesarean delivery

Journal

Ginekologia Polska

Issue

Vol 92, No 4 (2021)

Article type

Research paper

Pages

306-311

Published online

2020-10-01

DOI

10.5603/GP.a2020.0132

Pubmed

33448006

Bibliographic record

Ginekol Pol 2021;92(4):306-311.

Keywords

vaginal birth after cesarean
trial of labor after cesarean
maternal morbidity
maternal mortality
neonatal morbidity
neonatal mortality

Authors

Gizem İzbudak
Elif Tozkır
Ebru Cogendez
Faik Uzun
Semra Kayataş Eser

References (24)
  1. Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ, et al. Births: provisional data for 2016. Vital Statistics Rapid Release No 2. Hyattsville (MD): National Center for Health Statistics; 2017.
  2. Cheng YW, Eden KB, Marshall N, et al. Delivery after prior cesarean: maternal morbidity and mortality. Clin Perinatol. 2011; 38(2): 297–309.
  3. Flamm BL, Geiger AM. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: an admission scoring system. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90(6): 907–910.
  4. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, et al. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU). Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109(4): 806–812.
  5. Lundgren I, Smith V, Nilsson C, et al. Clinician-centred interventions to increase vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC): a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015; 15: 16.
  6. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 133 (2): e110-e127. 2019.
  7. ACOG practice bulletin number 115: vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynaecol 2010; 116: 450–463.
  8. Bottoms SF, Rosen MG, Sokol RJ. The increase in the cesarean birth rate. N Engl J Med. 1980; 302(10): 559–563.
  9. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 107(6): 1226–1232.
  10. National Institutes of Health, National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Panel. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development conference statement: vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights March 8-10, 2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115(6): 1279–1295.
  11. Rossi AC, D'Addario V. Maternal morbidity following a trial of labor after cesarean section vs elective repeat cesarean delivery: a systematic review with metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 199(3): 224–231.
  12. Bangal VB, Giri PA, Shinde KK, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean section. N Am J Med Sci. 2013; 5(2): 140–144.
  13. Phelan JP, Clark SL, Diaz F, et al. Vaginal birth after caesarean. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 157: 1510-1515.
  14. Hoskins IA, Gomez JL. Correlation between maximum cervical dilatation at cesarean delivery and subsequent vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 89(4): 591–593.
  15. McMahon MJ, Luther ER, Bowes WA, et al. Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med. 1996; 335(10): 689–695.
  16. Shipp T. Interdelivery interval and risk of symptomatic uterine rupture. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2001; 97(2): 175–177.
  17. Soni A, Sharma C, Verma S, et al. A prospective observational study of trial of labor after cesarean in rural India. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015; 129(2): 156–160.
  18. Bellows P, Shah U, Hawley L, et al. Evaluation of outcomes associated with trial of labor after cesarean delivery after a change in clinical practice guidelines in an academic hospital. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017; 30(17): 2092–2096.
  19. Studsgaard A, Skorstengaard M, Glavind J, et al. Trial of labor compared to repeat cesarean section in women with no other risk factors than a prior cesarean delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013; 92(11): 1256–1263.
  20. Guise JM, Denman MA, Emeis C, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115(6): 1267–1278.
  21. Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, et al. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor in women with multiple and single prior cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 108(1): 12–20.
  22. Senturk MB, Cakmak Y, Atac H, et al. Factors associated with successful vaginal birth after cesarean section and outcomes in rural area of Anatolia. Int J Womens Health. 2015; 7: 693–697.
  23. Landon MB, Leindecker S, Spong CY, et al. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The MFMU Cesarean Registry: factors affecting the success of trial of labor after previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 193(3 Pt 2): 1016–1023.
  24. Jongen VH, Halfwerk MG, Brouwer WK. Vaginal delivery after previous caesarean section for failure of second stage of labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998; 105(10): 1079–1081.

Regulations

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk
tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail:  viamedica@viamedica.pl