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.

Risk of stillbirth after a previous caesarean delivery: A Swedish nationwide cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the risk of stillbirth in relation to (1) a previous caesarean delivery (CD) compared with those following a vaginal birth (VB); and (2) vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) compared with a repeat CD. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: The Swedish Medical Birth registry. POPULATION: Women with their first and second singletons between 1982 and 2012. METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression models were performed to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the association between CD in the first pregnancy and stillbirth in the second pregnancy and the association between VBAC and stillbirth. Sub-group analyses were performed by types of CD and timing of stillbirth (antepartum and intrapartum). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stillbirth (antepartum and intrapartum fetal death). RESULTS: Of the 1 771 700 singleton births from 885 850 women, 117 114 (13.2%) women had a CD in the first pregnancy, and 51 755 had VBAC in the second pregnancy. We found a 37% increased odds of stillbirth (aOR 1.37; 95% CI 1.23-1.52) in women with a previous CD compared with VB. The odds of intrapartum stillbirth were higher in the previous pre-labour CD group (aOR 2.72; 95% CI 1.51-4.91) and in the previous in-labour CD group (aOR 1.35; 95% CI 0.76-2.40), although not statistically significant in the latter case. No increased odds were found for intrapartum stillbirth in women who had VBAC (aOR 0.99; 95% CI 0.48-2.06) compared with women who had a repeat CD. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that a CD is associated with an increased risk of subsequent stillbirth, with a greater risk among pre-labour CD. This association is not solely mediated by increases in intrapartum asphyxia, uterine rupture or attempted VBAC. Further research is needed to understand this association, but these findings might help healthcare providers to reach optimal decisions regarding mode of birth, particularly when CD is unnecessary.

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.

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.

Evaluating the impact of a trial of labor after cesarean section on labor duration: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Cesarean section (C-section) rates are increasing globally, and repeated C-sections are associated with increased maternal morbidity. Trial of labor after C-section (TOLAC) is an approach to reduce the recurrence of C-sections. However, limited research exists on the impact of cesarean scars on labor duration in TOLAC, considering the termination of labor through C-section and selection bias. This study aimed to investigate the impact of cesarean scars on labor duration in TOLAC participants, accounting for potential confounding factors and biases. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 2,964 women who attempted vaginal birth at a single center in Japan from 2012 to 2021. The study categorized participants into TOLAC (n = 187) and non-TOLAC (n = 2,777) groups. Propensity scores were calculated based on 14 factors that could influence labor duration, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for labor duration, with and without IPTW adjustment. Sensitivity analyses used propensity score matching, bootstrapping, and interval censoring to address potential biases, including recall bias in the reported onset of labor. RESULTS: The unadjusted HR for labor duration in the TOLAC group compared to the non-TOLAC group was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70-0.98, P = 0.027), indicating a longer labor duration in the TOLAC group. After adjusting for confounding factors using IPTW, the HR was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.74-1.30, P = 0.91), suggesting no significant difference in labor duration between the groups. Sensitivity analyses using propensity score matching, bootstrapping, and interval censoring yielded consistent results. These findings suggested that the apparent association between TOLAC and longer labor duration was because of confounding factors rather than TOLAC itself. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for confounding factors and addressing potential biases, cesarean scars had a limited impact on labor duration in TOLAC participants. Maternal and fetal characteristics may have a more substantial influence on labor duration.

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.

Short stature and vaginal dinoprostone as independent predictors of composite maternal-newborn adverse outcomes in induction of labor after one previous cesarean: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The rates of labor induction and cesarean delivery is rising worldwide. With the confluence of these trends, the labor induction rate in trials of labor after cesarean can be as high as 27-32.7%. Induction of labor after one previous cesarean (IOLAC) is a high-risk procedure mainly due to the higher risk of uterine rupture. Nevertheless, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists considers IOLAC as an option in motivated and informed women in the appropriate care setting. We sought to identify predictors of a composite of maternal and newborn adverse outcomes following IOLAC. METHODS: The electronic medical records of women who delivered between January 2018 to September 2022 in a Malaysian university hospital were screened to identify cases of IOLAC. A case is classified as a composite adverse outcome if at least one of these 11 adverse outcomes of delivery blood loss ≥ 1000 ml, uterine scar complications, cord prolapse or presentation, placenta abruption, maternal fever (≥ 38 0C), chorioamnionitis, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, Apgar score < 7 at 5 min, umbilical artery cord artery blood pH < 7.1 or base excess ≤-12 mmol/l, and neonatal ICU admission was present. An unplanned cesarean delivery was not considered an adverse outcome as the practical management alternative for a clinically indicated IOLAC was a planned cesarean. Bivariate analysis of participants' characteristics was performed to identify predictors of their association with composite adverse outcome. Characteristics with crude p < 0.10 on bivariate analysis were incorporated into a multivariable binary logistic regression analysis model. RESULTS: Electronic medical records of 19,064 women were screened. 819 IOLAC cases and 98 cases with composite adverse outcomes were identified. Maternal height, ethnicity, previous vaginal delivery, indication of previous cesarean, indication for IOLAC, and method of IOLAC had p < 0.10 on bivariate analysis and were incorporated into a multivariable binary logistic regression analysis. After adjustment, only maternal height and IOLAC by vaginal dinoprostone compared to Foley balloon remained significant at p < 0.05. Post hoc adjusted analysis that included all unplanned cesarean as an added qualifier for composite adverse outcome showed higher body mass index, short stature (< 157 cm), not of Chinese ethnicity, no prior vaginal delivery, prior cesarean indicated by labor dystocia, and less favorable Bishop score (< 6) were independent predictors of the expanded composite adverse outcome. CONCLUSION: Shorter women and IOLAC by vaginal dinoprostone compared to Foley balloon were independently predictive of composite of adverse outcome.

Shorter stature and dinoprostone labor induction are independent predictors of a composite maternal-newborn adverse outcome excluding unplanned cesarean delivery.

The outcomes for women planning a VBAC at a private hospital in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Rates of cesarean birth (CBs) are steadily increasing and account for 36.7% of all births in New South Wales (NSW), with primary cesareans driving the increase. NSW Health guidelines recommend women attempt a vaginal birth after a previous CB (VBAC); however, rates of VBAC are decreasing, particularly within the private hospital setting. This study aimed to determine the rates of adverse outcomes for women who planned a VBAC (pVBAC) compared with women who planned an elective repeat CB (pERCB) at one private hospital in Sydney, Australia. METHOD: This retrospective data review evaluated patient records over a 10-year period (2010-2019). Records (n = 2039) were divided into four groups: pVBAC, pVBAC + EMCB, labor + ERCB (lab + ERCB), and pERCB. The incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes is reported as counts and percentages. Regression and chi-squared tests were used to compare groups. Significance was determined at a p-value of <0.05. RESULTS: Overall, very low rates (N = 148, 7.3%) of women had a VBAC compared with a repeat CB at this private hospital over the 10-year period. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low regardless of study group. Outcomes differed significantly between groups for postpartum hemorrhage (pERCB seven times less likely than VBAC group) and special care nursery admission (pVBAC + EMCB is 4.6 times more likely than in the VBAC group). CONCLUSION: Overall, it is safe to attempt a VBAC at this private hospital, and labor after a cesarean should be recommended, yet very few women had a VBAC at the study site. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low compared with other published research.

The association between obesity and the success of trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) in women with past vaginal delivery.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of overweight (body mass index; BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m2), and obesity (BMI>30 kg/m2), on the success of trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC), with consideration of successful past vaginal birth. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was performed using electronic database of obstetrics department at a university-affiliated tertiary medical center. All women admitted for TOLAC at 37-42 weeks of gestational age, carrying a singleton live fetus at cephalic presentation, with a single previous low segment transverse cesarean delivery between 1/2015 and 5/2021 were included. Primary outcome was the rate of cesarean delivery during labor, and subgroup analysis was performed for the presence of past vaginal birth. RESULTS: Of the 1200 TOLAC deliveries meeting the inclusion criteria, 61.9 % had BMI in the normal range, 24.6 % were overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m2), and 13.4 % were obese (BMI of 30 kg/m2 and over). Using a multivariate analysis, BMI≥30 kg/m2 was associated with increased risk of cesarean delivery compared to normal weight. However, in the subgroup of 292 women with a history of successful vaginal birth BMI did not affect TOLAC success. CONCLUSIONS: BMI does not affect the success of TOLAC in women with previous vaginal birth. This information should be considered during patients counselling, in order to achieve a better selection of mode of delivery and higher patients' satisfaction.

Continuity obstetric care demonstrates greater vaginal birth after caesarean success.

BACKGROUND: Australia's caesarean rate is higher than Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average, and is rising. Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is safe for selected women. Midwifery continuity of care (CoC) is associated with higher rates of vaginal birth compared to other models; however, impacts on VBAC attempts and success are unknown. AIMS: The primary aim was to determine if there is a difference in achieving VBAC between CoC and non-CoC (NCoC) models. The secondary aim was to determine if there is a difference in the proportion of women attempting VBAC between these models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of antenatal records and birthing data of all women who birthed in 2021 with one or more previous caesareans. Women were included if they had two or fewer caesareans. Women were excluded if contraindications to VBAC existed. RESULTS: There were 142/1109 (12.8%) women who had previous caesareans and were eligible to attempt VBAC. There were 47/109 (43.1%) women who attempted vaginal birth after one caesarean with 78.7% success. After one caesarean, women in CoC were more likely to achieve VBAC than NCoC (45.2% vs 26.1%; relative risk (RR) 1.76, 95% CI 1.04-3.00), although when stratified by private and midwifery CoC models, women in midwifery CoC models were more likely to be successful (private RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.23-2.07 vs midwifery RR 2.48, 95% CI 1.50-4.11). Women in CoC were more likely to attempt VBAC (54.7% vs 34.8%; RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.02-2.41), and receive counselling about VBAC (92.5% vs 62%; RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.41-3.11). CONCLUSION: CoC improves the rate of attempted and successful VBAC through several factors, including increased counselling and greater provision of birth choices.

Effectiveness of shared decision-making for mode of delivery after caesarean section: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIM: To review the content, format and effectiveness of shared decision-making interventions for mode of delivery after caesarean section for pregnant women. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Six databases (PubMed, Web of science Core Collection, Cochrance Network, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched starting at the time of establishment of the database to May 2023. Following the PRISMAs and use Review Manager 5.3 software for meta-analysis. Two review authors independently assessed the quality of the studies using the risk of bias 2 tool. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023410536). RESULTS: The search strategy obtained 1675 references. After abstract and full text screening, a total of seven studies were included. Shared decision-making interventions include decision aids and counselling that can help pregnant women analyse the pros and cons of various options and help them make decisions that are consistent with their values. The pooled results showed that shared decision-making intervention alleviated decisional conflicts regarding mode of delivery after caesarean section, but had no effect on knowledge and informed choice. CONCLUSION: The results of our review suggest that shared decision-making is an effective intervention to improve the quality of decision-making about the mode of delivery of pregnant women after caesarean section. However, due to the low quality of the evidence, it is recommended that more studies be conducted in the future to improve the quality of the evidence. CORRELATION WITH CLINICAL PRACTICE: This systematic review and meta-analysis provides evidence for the effectiveness of shared decision-making for mode of delivery after cesarean section and may provide a basis for the development of intervention to promote the participation of pregnant women in the decision-making process.

Validation of a Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery Prediction Model Without Race and Ethnicity in Individuals With Two Prior Cesarean Deliveries.

Previous models for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) relied on race and ethnicity, raising concern for bias. In response, the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU) created a new prediction model without race and ethnicity for individuals with one prior cesarean delivery. We performed a secondary analysis of the MFMU Cesarean Registry database to evaluate whether the MFMU VBAC prediction model without race and ethnicity could accurately predict VBAC for individuals with two prior cesarean deliveries. Overall, 353 individuals were included and 252 (71%) had VBAC. An area under the curve for the receiver operating curve of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.69-0.80) was reported for the predicted probabilities for VBAC, indicating that the model can be used for prediction of VBAC in this population.

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.

Context-sensitive holistic care of women with one previous Caesarean section.

This article's emphasis is on the holistic care of women who are assessed as suitable for and amenable to vaginal birth after Caesarean section (VBAC) in the South African state health sector context. It is beyond its scope to deal with the minutiae of VBAC conduct, operative conduct of repeat Caesarean section (CS), or management of uterine rupture. It is also beyond the scope of the article to reflect on practices, which are accepted in other healthcare contexts. The intention is not to promote VBAC over elective repeat CS, but rather to assist healthcare workers with providing high-quality holistic care. The goal is that women with previous CS are given access to the mode of delivery, which is safest for them and their fetus, while minimising adverse psychological effects of previous and future negative birth experiences.

Factors associated with successful balloon catheter labor induction in women with a previous caesarean section: A retrospective single-center evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Labor induction of women with a history of uterine scarring is an increasingly frequent situation and one for which there are currently no clear professional recommendations favoring one method over another. The objectives of this study were to determine the success rate of balloon catheter induction in women with a history of caesarean section and to evaluate the main factors associated with vaginal delivery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective study was conducted between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018, in Lille, France, and included all women with one previous caesarean section who were induced by first-line balloon catheter induction. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with the primary outcome (vaginal delivery). RESULTS: Of the 310 women in the sample, 192 delivered vaginally (62 %). After adjustment, factors associated with successful induction (vaginal delivery) were the number of previous vaginal deliveries (odds ratio [OR] 1.37; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.81), evolution of the Bishop score after balloon removal (OR 1.24; 95 % CI 1.10-1.41), and the initial Bishop score (OR 1.17; 95 % CI 1.00-1.37). Uterine rupture was observed in three women (1 %). CONCLUSION: The vaginal delivery rate after balloon catheter induction in women with a previous caesarean section was 62 %. Prognostic factors for vaginal delivery include previous vaginal delivery, the initial Bishop score, and evolution of the Bishop score after balloon catheter induction.

Duration time of labor progression for pregnant women of vaginal birth after cesarean in Hubei, China.

OBJECTIVE: There have been limited reports on the duration of labor progression in pregnant women undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). This study aimed to investigate the duration of labor progression during VBAC in Hubei, China. METHODS: A total of 359 pregnant women undergoing VBAC were enrolled as the VBAC group, meeting the following criteria: singleton pregnancy, gestational age ≥ 37 weeks, live birth, history of cesarean delivery, and a willingness to attempt a vaginal delivery. At the same time, 359 primiparas successfully undergoing vaginal delivery were randomly enrolled in the control group at a 1:1 ratio. Subsequently, the durations of the first, second, and third stages of labor were comparatively analyzed between the two groups. RESULTS: The duration of the first, second, and total stages of labor in the VBAC group was significantly shorter than that in the control group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the duration of the third stage of labor between the two groups (p > 0.05). The amount of blood loss, the rate of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), and episiotomy were higher in the VBAC group than in the control group (p < 0.05). The rate of labor analgesia and intrapartum fever in the VBAC group was significantly lower than that in the control group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The duration of labor progression of the first, second, and total stages of VBAC is shorter than that in primiparous women in our observation in China.

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.

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.

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.