Duration of double balloon catheter for patients with prior cesarean: a before and after study.

Background: Previous studies that suggest a shorter time from cervical ripening balloon placement to delivery with shorter total balloon placement time have excluded patients with prior cesarean deliveries. Objective: To evaluate, in patients with a prior history of cesarean delivery undergoing cervical ripening with a double-balloon catheter, whether planned removal of device after 6 vs 12 hours would result in shorter time to vaginal delivery. Study Design: A before-and-after study was performed after a practice change occurred November 2020, shortening the planned time of double-balloon catheter placement for cervical ripening from 12 to 6 hours. Data were collected via retrospective electronic chart review. Primary outcome was time from balloon placement to vaginal delivery. Secondary outcomes included rates of cesarean delivery, maternal intraamniotic infection, and uterine rupture. Kaplan-Meier curves compared median times to delivery between the groups. A Cox proportional-hazards model was used to adjust for time of balloon placement, number of previous vaginal deliveries, and co-medications used. Results: From November 2018 to November 2022, 189 analyzable patients with a prior history of cesarean delivery received a double-balloon catheter for cervical ripening during their trial of labor. Patients were separated into pre- and postpolicy change groups (n=91 and 98, respectively). The median time to vaginal delivery for the pregroup was 28 hours (95% CI: 26, 35) and 25 hours (95% CI: 23, 29) for those in the postgroup (P value .052). After adjusting for dilation at time of balloon placement, number of previous vaginal deliveries, and co-medication, the estimated hazard ratio for successful vaginal delivery postpolicy change was 1.89 (95% CI: 1.27, 2.81). There were no differences in rates of secondary outcomes. Conclusion: In patients with prior cesarean delivery undergoing mechanical cervical ripening with a double-balloon catheter, planned removal at 6 hours compared to 12 hours may result in higher chances of successful vaginal delivery and possibly a shorter time to delivery, without increasing rates of cesarean delivery and intraamniotic infection.

Balancing Maternal Melanoma and Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) Delivery: A Case Report Highlighting Shared Decision-Making.

Melanoma is increasingly common among reproductive-age women and is one of the most common cancers diagnosed during pregnancy. The literature for melanoma in pregnancy, especially among those with prior uterine scars, is limited. We present an interesting case of a 22-year-old woman who went to her dermatologist for a suspicious lesion on her thigh. The lesion was excised, and histopathology confirmed that it was a melanoma. The dermatologist recommended immediate delivery. The patient then urged her obstetrician to undergo the risks of an induction of labor (IOL) for a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) because she desired a large family, and a second cesarean would make this more difficult to happen. She ultimately had a successful vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) and subsequent excision of the melanoma with surgical oncology in the immediate postpartum period. Therefore, the decision for IOL for TOLAC in this case was based on the patient's fears regarding melanoma disease progression in her 39th week. Given the short time course between delivery and excision of her melanoma, it is possible that she may have been able to wait for spontaneous labor, which would have avoided the risks associated with IOL for TOLAC. The optimal timing of surgical intervention for melanoma in pregnant patients who desire TOLAC is unknown. In pregnancies that are approaching their due date, waiting for spontaneous labor may be a reasonable approach to avoid the risks of labor induction, especially in women with prior cesarean delivery. A multidisciplinary approach involving dermatology, surgical oncology, and the obstetric team is warranted to optimize both dermatologic and obstetric outcomes.

Obstetrics and Gynecologic Hospitalists and Their Focus: Impact on Safety and Quality Metrics.

Obstetrics and gynecologic hospitalists play a pivotal role in the evolution of perinatal care. Hospitalists improve patient safety by providing on-site, reliable, high-quality care. Hospitalists help to reduce the rates of unnecessary cesarean deliveries and increase the rates of vaginal deliveries.

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.

Risks and Probabilities of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Trial of Labor after Cesarean-A Retrospective Study.

(1) Background: Trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) can be associated with significant maternal and neonatal complications, and the aim of this retrospective study was to calculate the risks and probabilities of these complications in two tertiary maternity centers in Romania. (2) Methods: A total of 216 patients who attempted TOLAC were included in the study and were segregated into two groups, depending on TOLAC success. Medical records were assessed, and clinical data were used to determine the maternal and neonatal risks and complications, using multinomial logistic regression and postestimation predictions. (3) Results: Our data indicated that patients who had a failed TOLAC had significantly higher risks and probabilities of uterine rupture, either complete or incomplete; intensive care unit (ICU) admission; and emergency hysterectomy. The newborns of these mothers had significantly higher risks and probabilities of low Apgar score at birth, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and invasive ventilation. (4) Conclusions: Failed TOLAC could lead to significant maternal and neonatal complications, and women who attempt this procedure should be monitored in a tertiary center where a multidisciplinary team and an emergency operating room are available.

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).

Effectiveness and Safety of the Double Intracervical Balloon vs Dinoprostone in Patients with Previous Cesarean Section.

To compare effectiveness and safety of the Cook's balloon with vaginal dinoprostone to induce labor in patients with previous cesarean section. Observational, and retrospective study that included pregnant women at ≥ 37 weeks' gestation, with unfavorable cervix, singleton pregnancy, intact membranes, and a previous cesarean section, who had undergone labor induction in the period 2014-2019. 170 patients (86 balloon-84 dinoprostone) were analyzed. The proportion of women achieving vaginal delivery within 24 h was higher in the dinoprostone than in double-balloon group (RR, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.36-7.72). No significant differences were detected in the first 48 h in vaginal deliveries (P = .749) or in cesarean section rates (P = .634). Nor were there differences in maternal or fetal safety profiles. A body mass index > 35 increased the risk of cesarean section by 1.53 times (P = .017) and a Bishop's test score < 3 by 1.91 times (P = .009). A vaginal delivery following a cesarean section decreased the probability of another cesarean section by 0.46 times (P = .039). Labor induction with vaginal dinoprostone achieves better vaginal delivery rates in the first 24 h vs Cook's balloon. While the difference in uterine rupture rate did not reach significance, this was higher in women receiving prostaglandin.

Delivery mode after cervical ripening among patients with no prior vaginal births.

PURPOSE: To compare mode of delivery and maternal and neonatal outcomes using cervical ripening balloon (CRB) for induction of labor (IOL) in nulliparous patients vs. those undergoing first trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study including data from two tertiary medical centers. Included were all patients with a singleton pregnancy and a gestational age > 37+0 weeks and no prior vaginal birth undergoing IOL with CRB. Nulliparous patients (nulliparous group) were compared to patients with one prior cesarean delivery (CD) and no prior vaginal delivery (TOLAC group). Patients who withdrew consent for trial of labor at any time in both groups were excluded. The primary outcome was mode of delivery. RESULTS: Overall, 161 patients were included in the TOLAC group and 1577 in the nulliparous group. The rate of CD was similar in both groups and remained similar after adjusting for confounders (29.8 % vs. 28.9 %, p = 0.86, OR 1.1, 95 %, CI 0.76-1.58). CD due to fetal distress was more common in the TOLAC group (75 % vs. 56 %, p = 0.014). Other maternal outcomes and neonatal outcomes were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Comparable vaginal delivery rates may be achieved in patients with or without a previous CD attempting their first trial of labor, with a cervical ripening balloon for labor induction, without increasing adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes.

External cephalic version following prior cesarean delivery: A comparative cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) in pregnant women with a history of previous cesarean section, as well as to describe the rate of complications associated with the procedure. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of women who were offered an ECV at "Virgen de la Arrixaca" Clinic University Hospital (Murcia, Spain) between January 2014 and December 2023. We collected data for previous cesarean delivery, obstetric history, fetal presentation, amniotic fluid volume, ECV success rate, complications related to ECV, mode of delivery, and neonatal outcomes. The study confidently performed ECV under sedation with propofol and tocolysis with ritodrine. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to compare the success rate of ECV, ECV complications, and mode of delivery between women with and without previous cesarean sections. RESULTS: Of 1116 pregnant women who were offered ECV, 911 were included in the study, with 42 having a previous cesarean section. The success rate of ECV in pregnant women with a previous cesarean section was 78.6% (adjusted odds ratio 1.18; 95% confidence interval 0.49-2.86; P = 0.708), with a low complication rate of 9.5%, such as non-reassuring fetal heart rate (7.1%) or major vaginal bleeding (2.4%). Of the women who attempted a vaginal delivery after ECV, 80.8% were successful. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support that ECV is a safe and effective option for women with a previous cesarean section, with success rates comparable to those in women without a previous cesarean section.

Induction of labor vs expectant management among low-risk patients with 1 prior cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Studies that have compared induction of labor in individuals with 1 prior cesarean delivery to expectant management have shown conflicting results. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between clinical outcomes and induction of labor at 39 weeks in a national sample of otherwise low-risk patients with 1 prior cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This cross-sectional study analyzed 2016 to 2021 US Vital Statistics birth certificate data. Individuals with vertex, singleton pregnancies, and 1 prior cesarean delivery were included. Patients with prior vaginal deliveries, delivery before 39 weeks 0 days or after 42 weeks 6 days of gestation, and medical comorbidities were excluded. The primary exposure of interest was induction of labor at 39 weeks 0 days to 39 weeks 6 days compared to expectant management with delivery from 40 weeks 0 days to 42 weeks 6 days. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery. The main secondary outcomes were separate maternal and neonatal morbidity composites. The maternal morbidity composite included uterine rupture, operative vaginal delivery, peripartum hysterectomy, intensive care unit admission, and transfusion. The neonatal morbidity composite included neonatal intensive care unit admission, Apgar score less than 5 at 5 minutes, immediate ventilation, prolonged ventilation, and seizure or serious neurological dysfunction. Unadjusted and adjusted log binomial regression models accounting for demographic variables and the exposure of interest (induction vs expectant management) were performed. Results are presented as unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2021, a total of 198,797 individuals with vertex, singleton pregnancies, and 1 prior cesarean were included in the primary analysis. Of these individuals, 25,915 (13.0%) underwent induction of labor from 39 weeks 0 days to 39 weeks 6 days and 172,882 (87.0%) were expectantly managed with deliveries between 40 weeks 0 days and 42 weeks 6 days. In adjusted analyses, patients induced at 39 weeks were more likely to have a vaginal delivery when compared to those expectantly managed (38.0% vs 31.8%; adjusted risk ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.28, 1.36). Among those who had vaginal deliveries, induction of labor was associated with increased likelihood of operative vaginal delivery (11.1% vs 10.0; adjusted risk ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.07, 1.24). The maternal morbidity composite occurred in 0.9% of individuals in both the induction and expectant management groups (adjusted risk ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.79, 1.06). The rates of uterine rupture (0.3%), peripartum hysterectomy (0.04% vs 0.05%), and intensive care unit admission (0.1% vs 0.2%) were all relatively low and did not differ significantly between groups. There was also no significant difference in the neonatal morbidity composite between the induction and expectant management groups (7.3% vs 6.7%; adjusted risk ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.98, 1.09). CONCLUSION: When compared to expectant management, elective induction of labor at 39 weeks in low-risk patients with 1 prior cesarean delivery was associated with a significantly higher likelihood of vaginal delivery with no difference in composite maternal and neonatal morbidity outcomes. Prospective studies are needed to better elucidate the risks and benefits of induction of labor in this patient population.

Accidental uterine extensions in cesarean deliveries - outcome of subsequent pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the obstetric, maternal and neonatal outcome in the subsequent pregnancy after a pregnancy with an accidental uterine extension (AUE) during cesarean delivery (CD), as well as the relationship between the different types of AUE (inferior, lateral and superior). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of all CD with AUE in a tertiary medical center between 01/2011-01/2022. Women with a prior CD with AUE were compared to a 1:3 ratio matched control group of women with a prior CD without AUE. All AUE were defined in their direction, size and mode of suturing. CD with deliberate uterine extensions were excluded. We evaluated obstetric, maternal and neonatal outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy after a pregnancy with AUE during CD. RESULTS: Comparing women with a prior CD with AUE (n=177) to the matched control group of women with a prior CD without AUE (n=528), we found no significant differences in proportions of uterine rupture or any other major complication or adverse outcome between the groups. There were no significant differences in the outcomes of the subsequent pregnancy in relation to the characteristics of the AUE (direction, size and mode of suturing). CONCLUSIONS: Subsequent pregnancies after AUE are not associated with higher maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes including higher proportions of uterine rupture compared to pregnancies without previous AUE. Different characteristics of the AUE do not impact the outcome.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Induction of labor after one previous cesarean: Predictors of vaginal birth.

Objective: To identify independent predictors for vaginal delivery after induction of labor after one cesarean (IOLAC). Study design: In this retrospective cohort study, the electronic medical record of 19064 women who delivered from January 2018-September 2022 in a university hospital in Malaysia were individually searched to identify cases of IOLAC. Preselected data points on characteristics and the outcome of mode of delivery were retrieved. Bivariate analysis was performed to identify predictor characteristics for the dichotomous outcomes of vaginal delivery vs unplanned cesarean delivery. Variables with crude p < 0.05 were incorporated into a multivariable binary logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors of vaginal delivery after IOLAC. Results: 819 IOLAC cases were identified. There were 465/819 (56.5 %) unplanned cesareans deliveries. Of the 14 selected characteristics, eight had p < 0.05 on bivariate analysis. After adjustment, six characteristics, body mass index, height, ethnicity, parity, previous cesarean indication and Bishop score were independently predictive of vaginal birth but not maternal age or method of labor induction. Birthweight, labor induction indication, gestational age, haemoglobin level, diabetes and hypertension in pregnancy were not significant at the level of bivariate analysis. Conclusion: Obesity, short stature, no prior vaginal delivery, previous cesarean indicated by failure to progress, unfavorable Bishop score and ethnicity were independent predictors for unplanned cesarean after IOLAC. These predictors should help guide women and their care providers in their shared decision-making about IOLAC.

Influence of organizational factors on the offer and success rate of a trial of labor after cesarean section in Belgium: an ecological study.

BACKGROUND: Trial of Labor After Cesarean is an important strategy for reducing the overall rate of cesarean delivery. Offering the option of vaginal delivery to a woman with a history of cesarean section requires the ability to manage a potential uterine rupture quickly and effectively. This requires infrastructure and organization of the maternity unit so that the decision-to-delivery interval is as short as possible when uterine rupture is suspected. We hypothesize that the organizational characteristics of maternity units in Belgium have an impact on their proposal and success rates of trial of labour after cesarean section. METHODS: We collected data on the organizational characteristics of Belgian maternity units using an online questionnaire. Data on the frequency of cesarean section, trial of labor and vaginal birth after cesarean section were obtained from regional perinatal registries. We analyzed the determinants of the proposal and success of trial of labor after cesarean section and report the associations as mean proportions. RESULTS: Of the 101 maternity units contacted, 97 responded to the questionnaire and data from 95 was included in the analysis. Continuous on-site presence of a gynecologist and an anesthetist was associated with a higher proportion of trial of labor after cesarean section, compared to units where staff was on-call from home (51% versus 46%, p = 0.04). There is a non-significant trend towards more trial of labor after cesarean section in units with an operating room in or near the delivery unit and a shorter transfer time, in larger units (> 1500 deliveries/year) and in units with a neonatal intensive care unit. The proposal of trial of labor after cesarean section and its success was negatively correlated to the number of cesarean section in the maternity unit (Spearman' rho = 0.50 and 0.42, p value < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Organizational differences in maternity units appear to affect the proposal of trial of labor after cesarean section. Addressing these organizational factors may not be sufficient to change practice, given that general tendency to perform a cesarean section in the maternity unit is the main contributor to the percentage of trial of labor after cesarean.

Trial of labor following cesarean in patients with bicornuate uterus: a multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether a trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) in women with a bicornuate uterus is associated with increased maternal and neonatal morbidity compared to women with a non-malformed uterus. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted at two university-affiliated centers between 2005 and 2021. Parturients with a bicornuate uterus who attempted TOLAC following a single low-segment transverse cesarean delivery (CD) were included and compared to those with a non-malformed uterus. Failed TOLAC rates and the rate of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared using both univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Among 20,844 eligible births following CD, 125 (0.6%) were identified as having a bicornuate uterus. The overall successful vaginal delivery rate following CD in the bicornuate uterus group was 77.4%. Failed TOLAC rates were significantly higher in the bicornuate group (22.4% vs. 10.5%, p < 0.01). Uterine rupture rates did not differ between the groups, but rates of placental abruption and retained placenta were significantly higher among parturients with a bicornuate uterus (9.8% vs. 4.4%, p < 0.01, and 9.8% vs. 4.4%, p < 0.01, respectively). Neonatal outcomes following TOLAC were less favorable in the bicornuate group, particularly in terms of neonatal intensive care unit admission and neonatal sepsis. Multivariate analysis revealed an independent association between the bicornuate uterus and failed TOLAC. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that parturients with a bicornuate uterus who attempted TOLAC have a relatively high overall rate of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). However, their chances of achieving VBAC are significantly lower compared to those with a non-malformed uterus. Obstetricians should be aware of these findings when providing consultation to patients.