A randomized controlled trial reducing cesarean delivery rates in China by introducing trial of labor after cesarean and electrohysterography.

OBJECTIVE: A cesarean delivery (CD) can affect health of both mother and child and future pregnancies. Since the abandonment of the one-child policy in China, obstetricians tend to perform a repeat CD rather than a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). This study aims to reduce CD rates by increasing vaginal births after cesarean (VBAC) rates and introducing electrohysterography (EHG) for accurate monitoring. METHODS: In total, 82 women received counseling regarding TOLAC at the Shijiazhuang Sixth Hospital in China. Women opting for TOLAC were randomized for either external tocodynamometry (TOCO, i.e. standard care) or EHG. The primary outcome was the VBAC rate. Secondary outcomes were indications for CD, percentage of assisted vaginal deliveries, labor duration, maternal blood loss, complications and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: After accounting for preterm delivery and dropouts, all counseled women opted for a TOLAC (100%). After randomization, 42 women were included in the TOCO-group and 37 in the EHG-group. Women did not receive pain medication and labor was not augmented with oxytocin. The VBAC rate was 71.4% in the TOCO-group, versus 78.4% in the EHG-group (p = .48). Birth was assisted with forceps in 11.9% of TOCO-group versus 2.7% of EHG-group (p = .21). One secondary CD (i.e. a shift from intended vaginal delivery to surgical delivery within the same labor) was performed because of a suspicion of uterine rupture (TOCO-group). Other indications for CD were: fetal distress, labor dystocia, fetal position, cephalopelvic disproportion. There were no significant differences in secondary study outcomes. No complications were reported. CONCLUSION: This study showed an average VBAC rate of 75%, without any complications, in a hospital with no previous experience with TOLAC. The VBAC rate with EHG-monitoring was higher than TOCO, although this difference was not significant. To demonstrate a significant difference, larger clinical studies are necessary. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Daily Board of the Medical Ethics Committee of The Maternal and Child Hospital of Shijiazhuang approved the study protocol (number 20171018, Dutch Trial Register NL8199).

X-ray Pelvimetry Has No Impact on the Outcomes of Trial of Labor after Cesarean Delivery: A Retrospective Single-center Study.

Few studies have examined the relationship between pelvic size and the success or failure of trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC). Here we aimed to determine whether pelvic size and morphological data obtained from radiography contribute to the first successful TOLAC. This retrospective single-center observational study enrolled pregnant women who underwent TOLAC between 2010 and 2021. The results of X-ray pelvimetry data, including obstetric conjugate (OC), transverse diameter of the pelvic inlet (TD), anteroposterior diameter of the pelvic inlet (APD), shape of the pelvic inlet, and other obstetrical clinical data, were compared between the success and failure groups. Seventy-five patients in successful group after excluding 35 patients with previous successful TOLAC, and 21 patients in failure group were eligible. The failure group had a higher rate of previous cesarean sections due to failed labor trials (p = 0.042) and heavier newborns (p = 0.014). OC, TD, and APD on X-ray pelvimetry did not differ significantly between the two groups nor did the shape of the pelvic inlet affect the success rate for TOLAC. The generalized linear model identified a history of failed trials of labor as a significant predictor of failed TOLAC (odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval 0.071-0.923; p = 0.037), whereas no pelvimetric parameters were found. Pelvic size and morphological findings have no discernible impact on the outcomes of TOLAC. The universal application of X-ray pelvimetry in all women attempting TOLAC may not have significant clinical relevance.

Trial of labour following two previous caesarean sections - A UK cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the (i) predictors of and associated rates of success and; (ii) maternal and perinatal outcomes of women undergoing trial of labour after two previous caesarean sections (TOLA2C). STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study collected data from two regional obstetric centres with 12,000 deliveries per annum collectively. The population included singleton pregnancies undergoing (i) TOLA2C, (ii) elective repeat caesarean section following two caesarean sections (ERCS) and (iii) trial of labour after one caesarean section (TOLA1C). Data was collected electronically from 2013 to 2021. Statistical analysis included Fisher exact and Kruskal-Wallis test to compare unpaired samples alongside univariate and multivariable logistic regression. The primary outcome measure was maternal and perinatal outcome. RESULTS: The three groups included; n = 146 TOLA2C, n = 206 ERCS and n = 99 TOLA1C. TOLA2C had a success rate of 65 % compared to 74 % for TOLA1C (p = 0.16). The optimal predictor of successful TOLA2C was previous successful TOLA1C OR 8.65 (95 % CI 2.75-38.41). TOLA2C was associated with greater risk of endometritis and/or sepsis postnatally compared to the other two groups [10.3 % (n = 15) versus 0.5 % (n = 1) and 3 % (n = 3) for ERCS and TOLA1C respectively p < 0.01]. It was also associated with longer maternal hospital stay [2.4 days (+/-1.8) versus 1.8 (+/-0.8) and 1.8 (+/-1.7) p < 0.01], a greater proportion of neonates with Apgar scores less than 7 (p=<0.01) and higher rates of neonatal unit admission [14 % (n = 20) versus 5 % (n = 11) versus 4 % (n = 4) (p=<0.01)]. CONCLUSION: Women considering trial of labour following two caesarean sections should be counselled regarding the potential increased risk of endometritis, sepsis and adverse neonatal outcome.

Examining provider practice-level disparities in delivery outcomes among patients with a history of Cesarean Delivery.

BACKGROUND: Choosing whether to pursue a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) or scheduled repeat cesarean delivery (SRCD) requires prenatal assessment of risks and benefits. Providers and patients play a central role in this process. However, the influence of provider-associated characteristics on delivery methods remains unclear. We hypothesized that different provider practice groups have different obstetric outcomes in patients with one prior cesarean delivery (CD). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of deliveries between April 29, 2015 - April 29, 2020. Subjects were divided into three cohorts: SRCD, successful VBAC, and unsuccessful VBAC (patients who chose TOLAC but had a CD). Disparities were reviewed between five different obstetric provider practice groups, determined from a breakdown of different providers delivering at the study site during the study period. Proportional differences were examined using Chi-squared tests and logistic regression models. RESULTS: 1,439 deliveries were included in the study. There were significant proportional disparities between patients in the different groups. Specifically, patients from Group D were significantly more likely to undergo successful VBAC, while patients seeing a provider from Group A were more likely to deliver by SRCD. In our multivariate analysis of successful versus unsuccessful VBAC, patients from Group D had greater odds ratios of successful VBAC compared to Group A. Patients delivered by Group E had a significantly lower odds ratio of successful VBAC. CONCLUSION: This study suggests an association between provider practice groups and delivery outcomes among patients with one prior CD. These data contribute to a growing body of literature around patient choice in pregnancy and the interplay of patients and providers. These findings help to guide future investigations to improve outcomes among patients with a history of CD.

Predictors of successful trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) in women with one prior transverse cesarean section at Tertiary Hospitals in northwest Ethiopia: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Trials of labor after cesarean section is the preferred strategy to decrease the cesarean delivery rate and reducing complications associated with multiple cesarean sections. The success rate of trials of labor after cesarean section and associated factors have not been well documented in Ethiopia. Hence, this study was aimed to determine the success rate and factors associated with the trial of labor after one cesarean section in five Comprehensive Specialized Hospitals located in northwest Ethiopia. METHODS: An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 437 women who came for the trial of labor from December 1, 2021, to March 30, 2022. All women who fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included to this study. Data was collected using structured and pre-tested questionnaire. Then, the data was entered into Epi Data 4.6 software and exported to SPSS version 26 for analysis. To identify the variables influencing the outcome variable, bivariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. The model's fitness was checked using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test, and an adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval was used to declare the predictors that are significantly associated with TOLAC. RESULTS: The success rate of the trial of labor after one cesarean section was 56.3% (95% CI, 51.3%, 61.2%). Maternal age ≥ 35 years (AOR: 3.3, 95% CI 1.2, 9.3), the fetal station at admission ≤ zero (AOR: 5. 6, 95% CI 3.3, 9.5), vaginal delivery before cesarean section (AOR: 1.9, 95% CI 1.2, 3.2), and successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (AOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2, 4.1) were found to have a significant association with the success rate of trial of labor after cesarean section. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the success rate of the trial of labor after a cesarean section was low as compared to the ACOG guideline and other studies in different countries. Therefore, the clinicians ought to offer counsel during antenatal and intrapartum period, encourage the women to make informed decision on the mode of delivery, and the practitioners need to follow fetal and maternal conditions strictly to minimize adverse birth outcomes.

Application of a specific clinical pathway can affect the choice of trial of labor in patients with a history of cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Mode of delivery in women with previous history of cesarean delivery (CD) is highly modifiable by the practices of the delivery unit. Vaginal birth after a cesarean (VBAC) delivery is a safe and preferred alternative in most cases. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of adopting a complex set of measures aimed at the mode of delivery in this group. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study comparing two birth cohorts before and after the implementation of a series of quality improvement (QI) interventions. The study cohorts comprised women with a history of cesarean delivery who gave birth in the period before (January 2013 - December 2015) and after (January 2018 - December 2020) the adoption of the QI measures. The measures were focused on singleton term cephalic pregnancies with a low transverse incision in the uterus. Measures included approval of all planned CDs by a senior obstetrician, re-training staff on the use of the FIGO classification for intrapartum fetal cardiotocogram, establishing VBAC management guidelines, encouraging epidural analgesia during trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), establishing a labor ward team and introducing a monthly maternity audit. RESULTS: Term singleton cephalic pregnancies with previous history of CD accounted for 12.55% of all births in the pre-intervention period and 12.01% in the post-intervention period. The frequency of cesarean deliveries decreased from 89.94% in the pre-intervention period to 64.47% in the post-intervention period (p < 0.0001). We observed a significant increase in TOLAC from 13.18 to 42.12% (p<0.0001) and also an increase in successful VBAC from 76.27 to 84.35% (p < 0.0001). All changes occurred without statistically significant change in overall perinatal mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility to safely increase trial of labor and vaginal birth after cesarean delivery by implementing a series of quality improvement interventions and clinical pathway changes.

Do all patients with history of pelvic ring injuries need a cesarean section? - A survey of orthopaedic and obstetric providers.

OBJECTIVE(S): The recommended mode of delivery following pelvic ring fractures with surgical fixation is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess expert opinions from orthopaedic surgeons and obstetrician gynecologists on their recommended delivery recommendations for pregnant individuals with a history of pelvic ring injury, and to see if there was any difference in recommendations between the two specialties, and what factors influenced recommendations. STUDY DESIGN: An electronic, web-based survey was administered to a convenience sample of orthopaedic surgeons and obstetrician gynecologists, via advertisement to members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA), the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine, and querying obstetrician gynecologists practicing within the Military Health System. The survey was administered from November 2021 to December 2022. A two-proportion z-test, Chi-square or Fisher's Exact Test, and descriptive statistics were used to analyze data. RESULTS: Survey respondents included 44 orthopaedic surgeons and 37 obstetricians. A total of 74 % obstetricians would recommend a trial of labor with hardware in place, while orthopaedic surgeon's recommendations varied based on the type of fixation. Forty four, 100 % of orthopaedic surgeons, recommended trial of labor if non-operative pelvic injury or unilateral posterior fixation only, 88 % recommended trial of labor if bilateral posterior fixation only, and 47.7 % for anterior trans-symphyseal plating only, 50 % for unilateral posterior and trans-symphyseal plating, and 43.2 % for bilateral posterior fixation with trans-symphyseal plating. CONCLUSIONS: The results of these surveys demonstrate the lack of consensus as to the most appropriate birth plan for patients with a history of pelvic ring injuries. Vaginal delivery following pelvic ring fracture and fixation is possible, yet these patients are significantly more likely to undergo cesarean section than the general population. As such, we recommend that women who become pregnant after operative treatment of a pelvic ring injury develop an in-depth birthing plan with their obstetrician to determine the best course.

Trial of labor versus elective cesarean delivery for patients with two prior cesarean sections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Cesarean section (CS) rates have been on the rise globally, leading to an increasing number of women facing the decision between a Trial of Labor after two Cesarean Sections (TOLAC-2) or opting for an Elective Repeat Cesarean Section (ERCS). This study evaluates and compares safety outcomes of TOLAC and ERCS in women with a history of two previous CS deliveries. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMbase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched for studies published until 30 June 2023. Eligible studies were included based on predetermined criteria, and a random-effects model was employed to pool data for maternal and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with a combined sample size of 101,011 women who had two prior CS were included. TOLAC-2 was associated with significantly higher maternal mortality (odds ratio (OR)=1.50, 95% confidence interval (CI)= 1.25-1.81) and higher chance of uterine rupture (OR = 7.15, 95% CI = 3.44-14.87) compared to ERCS. However, no correlation was found for other maternal outcomes, including blood transfusion, hysterectomy, or post-partum hemorrhage. Furthermore, neonatal outcomes, such as Apgar scores, NICU admissions, and neonatal mortality, were comparable in the TOLAC-2 and ERCS groups. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest an increased risk of uterine rupture and maternal mortality with TOLAC-2, emphasizing the need for personalized risk assessment and shared decision-making by healthcare professionals. Additional studies are needed to refine our understanding of these outcomes in the context of TOLAC-2.

Trial of labor after cesarean, vaginal birth after cesarean, and the risk of uterine rupture: an expert review.

The decision to pursue a trial of labor after cesarean delivery is complex and depends on patient preference, the likelihood of successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, assessment of the risks vs benefits of trial of labor after cesarean delivery, and available resources to support safe trial of labor after cesarean delivery at the planned birthing center. The most feared complication of trial of labor after cesarean delivery is uterine rupture, which can have catastrophic consequences, including substantial maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Although the absolute risk of uterine rupture is low, several clinical, historical, obstetrical, and intrapartum factors have been associated with increased risk. It is therefore critical for clinicians managing patients during trial of labor after cesarean delivery to be aware of these risk factors to appropriately select candidates for trial of labor after cesarean delivery and maximize the safety and benefits while minimizing the risks. Caution is advised when considering labor augmentation and induction in patients with a previous cesarean delivery. With established hospital safety protocols that dictate close maternal and fetal monitoring, avoidance of prostaglandins, and careful titration of oxytocin infusion when induction agents are needed, spontaneous and induced trial of labor after cesarean delivery are safe and should be offered to most patients with 1 previous low transverse, low vertical, or unknown uterine incision after appropriate evaluation, counseling, planning, and shared decision-making. Future research should focus on clarifying true risk factors and identifying the optimal approach to intrapartum and induction management, tools for antenatal prediction, and strategies for prevention of uterine rupture during trial of labor after cesarean delivery. A better understanding will facilitate patient counseling, support efforts to improve trial of labor after cesarean delivery and vaginal birth after cesarean delivery rates, and reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with uterine rupture during trial of labor after cesarean delivery.

Trial of labor after 2 previous cesareans: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Trial of labor after cesarean after 2 cesarean deliveries is linked to a lower success rate of vaginal delivery and higher rates of adverse obstetrical outcomes than trial of labor after cesarean after 1 previous cesarean delivery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with failed trial of labor after cesarean among women with 2 previous cesarean deliveries. STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study, which included all women with singleton pregnancies attempting trial of labor after cesarean after 2 previous cesarean deliveries between 2003 and 2021. This study compared labor, maternal, and neonatal characteristics between women with failed trial of labor after cesarean and those with successful trial of labor after cesarean. Univariate analysis was initially performed, followed by multivariable analysis (adjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals). RESULTS: The study included a total of 1181 women attempting trial of labor after cesarean after 2 previous cesarean deliveries. Among these cases, vaginal birth after cesarean was achieved in 973 women (82.4%). Women with failed trial of labor after cesarean had higher rates of maternal and neonatal morbidities. Several factors were found to be associated with failed trial of labor after cesarean, including longer interpregnancy and interdelivery intervals, lower gravidity and parity, lower rates of previous successful vaginal delivery, smoking, earlier gestational age at delivery (38.3±2.1 vs 39.5±1.3 weeks), late preterm delivery (34-37 weeks of gestation), lower cervical dilation on admission, no use of epidural, and smaller neonatal birthweight. Our multivariable model revealed that late preterm delivery (adjusted odds ratio, 3.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-10.47) and cervical dilation on admission for labor <3 cm (adjusted odds ratio, 2.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-4.54) were associated with higher odds of failed trial of labor after cesarean. CONCLUSION: In the investigated population of women with 2 previous cesarean deliveries undergoing trial of labor after cesarean, admission at the late preterm period with a cervical dilation of <3 cm, which reflects the latent phase, may elevate the risk of failed trial of labor after cesarean and a repeated intrapartum cesarean delivery.

Cesarean Delivery Complicated by Peripartum Infection and Risk of Uterine Rupture During Subsequent Trial of Labor.

Background: Uterine rupture is a rare, but dangerous obstetric complication that can occur during trial of vaginal birth. Methods: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between peripartum infection at the first caesarean delivery to uterine dehiscence or rupture at the subsequent delivery. We conducted a retrospective case-control study from March 2014 to October 2020 at a single academic medical center. The study group included women with a prior caesarean delivery and proven dehiscence or uterine rupture diagnosed during their subsequent delivery. The control group included women who went through a successful vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) without evidence of dehiscence or uterine rupture. We compared the rate of peripartum infection during the first cesarean delivery (CD) and other relevant variables, between the two groups. Results: A total of 168 women were included, 71 with uterine rupture or dehiscence and 97 with successful VBAC as the control group. The rate of peripartum infection at the first caesarean delivery was significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group (22.2% vs. 8.2%, p = 0.013). Multivariate logistic regression analysis found that peripartum infection remained an independent risk factor for uterine rupture at the subsequent trial of labor after CD (95% confidence interval, p = 0.034). Conclusion: Peripartum infection in the first caesarean delivery, may be an independent risk-factor for uterine rupture in a subsequent delivery.

Trial of labor after cesarean: Maternal and neonatal outcomes from the Consortium on Safe Labor.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study is to describe maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing trial of labor after cesarean from the Consortium on Safe Labor. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of the Consortium on Safe Labor database, a retrospective cohort study over a 7 year study period. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were evaluated based on desired delivery mode: planned elective repeat cesarean delivery or trial of labor after cesarean. RESULTS: Of 9858 patients in our analysis, our study population had 4400 patients (45%) who desired trial of labor after cesarean and 5458 patients (55%) who desired elective repeat cesarean delivery. Women who attempted trial of labor after cesarean compared to those who had an elective repeat cesarean delivery were more likely to have an obstetric hemorrhage (adjusted odds ratio 1.6; 95% CI 1.3 -2.0) and blood transfusion (adjusted odds ratio 2.3; 95% CI 1.6 -3.2). CONCLUSION: Maternal morbidity in women undergoing trial of labor after cesarean was predominantly hemorrhage-related.

The impact of a trial of labor after cesarean versus elective repeat cesarean delivery: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The increasing global incidence of cesarean section has prompted efforts to reduce cesarean delivery rates. A trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) has emerged as an alternative to elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD) for women with a prior cesarean delivery. However, the available evidence on the comparative outcomes of these 2 options remains inconsistent, primarily due to varying advantages and risks associated with each. Our meta-analysis aims to compare the maternal-neonatal results in TOLAC and ERCD in women with prior cesarean deliveries. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library databases up to September,2022 to identity studies evaluating perinatal outcomes in women who underwent TOLAC compared to ERCD following a previous cesarean delivery. The included studies were subjected to meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software to assess the overall findings. RESULTS: A total of 13 articles were included in this meta-analysis. Statistically significant differences were identified in the rate of uterine rupture (OR = 2.01,95%CI = 1.48-2.74, P < .00001) and APGAR score < 7 at 5 minutes (OR = 2.17,95%CI = 1.69-2.77, P < .00001) between the TOLAC and ERCD groups. However, no significant differences were observed in the rates of hysterectomy, maternal blood transfusion, postpartum infection, postpartum hemorrhage and neonatal intensive care unit (P ≥ .05) admission between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis revealed that TOLAC is associated with a higher risk of uterine rupture and lower incidence APGAR score < 7 at 5 minutes compared to ERCD. It is vital to consider predictive factors when determining the appropriate mode of delivery in order to ensure optimal pregnancy outcomes. Efforts should be made to identify the underlying causes of adverse outcomes and implement safety precautions to select suitable participants and create safe environments for TOLAC.

Impacted fetal head extraction methods at second stage cesarean and subsequent preterm delivery: A multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: Second-stage cesarean delivery (CD) is associated with subsequent preterm birth (PTB). It has been suggested that an increased risk of PTB after second-stage cesarean delivery could be linked to a higher chance of cervical injury due to the extension of the uterine incision. Previous studies have shown that reverse breech extraction is associated with lower rates of uterine incision extensions compared to the "push" method. We aimed to investigate the association between the method of fetal extraction during second-stage CD and the rate of spontaneous PTB (sPTB), as well as other maternal and neonatal outcomes during the subsequent pregnancy. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study. The study population included women in their first subsequent singleton delivery following a second-stage CD between 2004 and 2021. The main exposure of interest was the method of fetal extraction in the index CD ("push" method vs. reverse breech extraction). The primary outcome of this study was sPTB <37 weeks in the subsequent pregnancy. Secondary outcomes were overall PTB, trial of labor, and other adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Univariate analysis was followed by multiple logistic regression modeling. RESULTS: During the study period, 2969 index CD during second stage were performed, of those 583 met the inclusion criteria, of whom 234 (40.1%) had fetal extraction using the reverse breech extraction method, while 349 (59.9%) had the "push" method for extraction. In univariate analysis, women in those two groups had statistically similar rates of sPTB (3.7% vs. 3.0%; odds ratio [OR] 1.25, 95% CI: 0.49-3.19) and overall PTB (<37, <34 and <32 weeks), as well as other maternal, neonatal, and trial of labor outcomes. This was confirmed by multivariate analyses with an adjusted OR of 1.27 (95% CI: 0.43-3.71) for sPTB. CONCLUSION: Among women with a previous second-stage CD, no significant difference was observed in PTB rates in the subsequent pregnancies following the "push" method compared to the reverse breech extraction method.

Impact of prior use of topical hemostatic agents on trial of labor after cesarean: Insights from a multicenter cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between a topical hemostatic agent used at the time of cesarean delivery and uterine scar disruption (rupture or dehiscence) at the subsequent trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted (2005-2021). Parturients with a singleton pregnancy in whom a topical hemostatic agent was placed during the primary cesarean delivery were compared with patients in whom no such agent was placed. We assessed the uterine scar disruption rate after the subsequent TOLAC and the rate of adverse maternal outcomes. Univariate analyses were followed by multivariate analysis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]; 95% confidence interval [CI]). RESULTS: During the study period, 7199 women underwent a trial of labor and were eligible for the study; 430 (6.0%) had prior use of a hemostatic agent, 6769 (94.0%) did not. In univariate analysis, a history of topical hemostatic agent use was not found to be significantly associated with uterine scar rupture, dehiscence, or failed trial of labor. This was also confirmed on multivariate analysis for uterine rupture (aOR 1.91, 95% CI 0.66-5.54; P = 0.23), dehiscence of uterine scar (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 0.56-4.68; P = 0.37), and TOLAC failure (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 0.79-1.48; P = 0.61). CONCLUSION: A history of hemostatic agent use is not associated with an increased risk for uterine scar disruption after subsequent TOLAC. Further prospective studies in other settings are needed to strengthen these findings.

Perinatal outcomes following uterine rupture during a trial of labor after cesarean: A 12-year single-center experience.

OBJECTIVE: To determine perinatal outcomes following uterine rupture during a trial of labor after one previous cesarean delivery (CD) at term. METHODS: A retrospective single-center study examining perinatal outcomes in women with term singleton pregnancies with one prior CD, who underwent a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and were diagnosed with uterine rupture, between 2011 and 2022. The primary outcome was a composite maternal outcome, and the secondary outcome was a composite neonatal outcome. Additionally, we compared perinatal outcomes between patients receiving oxytocin during labor with those who did not. RESULTS: Overall, 6873 women attempted a TOLAC, and 116 were diagnosed with uterine rupture. Among them, 63 (54.3%) met the inclusion criteria, and 18 (28%) had the maternal composite outcome, with no cases of maternal death. Sixteen cases (25.4%) had the composite neonatal outcome, with one case (1.6%) of perinatal death. No differences were noted between women receiving oxytocin and those not receiving oxytocin in the rates of maternal composite (35.7% vs 26.5%, P = 0.502, respectively) or neonatal composite outcomes (21.4% vs 26.5%, P = 0.699). CONCLUSION: Uterine rupture during a TOLAC entails increased risk for myriad adverse outcomes for the mother and neonate, though possibly more favorable than previously described. Oxytocin use does not affect these risks.

Novel multidisciplinary cooperation model for obstetric medical quality control: A quasi-experimental study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of a novel multidisciplinary cooperation model in obstetric medical quality control. METHODS: This quasi-experimental study analyzed the quality indicators of full-term pregnant women who underwent vaginal trial labor in Zibo Maternal and Child Health Hospital between July 2021 and June 2022. The pregnant women were divided into two groups based on implementation of novel multidisciplinary cooperation: multidisciplinary and non-multidisciplinary. We compared the rate of labor analgesia, postpartum hemorrhage in vaginal delivery, transfer to cesarean section, and the 5-min Apgar score ≤7 in full-term neonates. RESULTS: A total of 3751 pregnant women were enrolled into the study, of whom 2004 were included in the non-multidisciplinary group and 1747 in the multidisciplinary group. The analgesic rate of delivery of the multidisciplinary group was higher than that of the non-multidisciplinary group (P = 0.000). We established that the rate of postpartum bleeding (P = 0.040), transfer cesarean section (P = 0.003) and the incidence of Apgar score ≤7 in 5 min of full-term neonates (P = 0.038) of the multidisciplinary group was lower than that of the non-multidisciplinary group. There was no significant difference in the mean ages (29.40 ± 3.99 vs. 29.90 ± 4.27 years; P = 0.126), mean delivery gestational ages (39.65 ± 0.87 vs. 39.64 ± 1.06; P = 0.221), mean gravidity values (1.93 ± 1.09 vs. 2.00 ± 1.18; P = 0.586) and mean parity (1.40 ± 0.56 vs. 1.42 ± 0.59; P = 0.635) of the women in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary cooperation in delivery management can significantly improve some quality indicators. We established the analgesic rate of delivery can be increased and the rate of postpartum bleeding, transfer cesarean section and the incidence of Apgar score ≤7 in 5 min of full-term neonates can be decreased with the implementation of novel multidisciplinary cooperation.