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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

Evaluation of the perinatal anxiety and its effect on delivery type in those who want to have a vaginal birth after a cesarean section.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the level of perinatal anxiety in pregnant women who considered vaginal birth after a cesarean section (VBAC) and evaluate its effect on the type of delivery. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study was planned as single-centered and analytical. It was performed with pregnant women planning VBAC, reached via Google Forms between February 23 and August 17, 2022. An online form consisting of the Patient Information Form and the Perinatal Anxiety Screening Scale-Turkish version (PASS-TR) was applied to the participants. The type of delivery was questioned by phone call. RESULTS: Ages of 162 pregnant women ranged from 22 to 40 years (mean=31.08±3.75). 54.9% (n=89) had a gestational week of 37 or more. 83.3% (n=135) had a vaginal delivery, and 54.3% (n=88) had a score of >16 on PASS-TR. PASS-TR total and subscale scores were higher in patients with known gynecological diseases (p<0.001). The total score of PASS-TR was higher in those aged between 18-30 years (p=0.027). The total number of pregnancies was higher in those with a PASS-TR score of ≤16 (p=0.007). There was no statistically significant difference between the total and subscale scores of PASS-TR with the type of delivery after cesarean section. CONCLUSIONS: Perinatal anxiety was determined in 54.3% of the pregnant women planning VBAC, and 83.3% had a successful vaginal delivery. Age, low gravida, and the presence of gynecological diseases were risk factors for anxiety. There was no relationship between the type of delivery after cesarean section and perinatal anxiety.

Retrospective evaluation of labor induction with scar uterus at the university hospital of Rennes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was a retrospective evaluation of labor induction in women with one previous cesarean section. The primary outcome was the mode of delivery. We also studied the severe maternal and neonatal morbidity and identify some prediction factors of vaginal delivery after labor induction after one previous cesarean section. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective observational monocentric study performed over the period from January 1st, 2016 to April 30th, 2020 at the university hospital of Rennes. Were included women with scar uterus because of one previous cesarean section with a viable singleton fetus in cephalic presentation and an induction of labor for medical reason, at term. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze prediction of vaginal delivery after labor induction after one previous cesarean section. We also studied maternal (included uterine rupture, loss of blood, obstetrical injury of anus sphincter) and neonatal (APGAR score, arterial umbilical pH after 1 minute of life and eventual admission to neonatal unit) morbidity. We used a stepwise multivariate logistic regression model to select variables for multivariate analysis. The model with the lowest Akaike Index Criteria was chosen. RESULTS: The study enrolled 353 women with scar uterus: 121 women were induced by balloon catheter, 57 by osmotic cervical dilatators, 91 by oxytocin alone, 84 by amniotomy. Vaginal delivery rate was 47,9%. There was 45% of vaginal delivery in the group with Bishop < 6 before induction of labor versus 62% in the group with Bishop ≥ 6. There was no statistically significative difference in neonatal and maternal severe morbidities between vaginal delivery and cesarean section: 4,5% of severe maternal morbidities (n = 16). Among their, we highlighted 7 uterine ruptures (3,8%). We observed also 3% of postpartum severe hemorrhage in vaginal delivery group (n = 5) against 1,6% in cesarian section group (n = 3) with no statistical significant difference (p = 0,632). Regarding to the obstetric perineal tears and lacerations we noticed 1,2% of OASIS 3 (n = 2) and 0,6% of OASIS 4 (n = 1). Severe neonatal morbidities were comparable by mode of delivery without significant difference: APGAR score at 5 min was similar (p = 1), as well as arterial umbilical pH after 1 min. (p = 0.719) and admissions to a neonatal unit (p = 1). Two variables were statistically associated with vaginal delivery after labor induction in women with scar uterus: Bishop score ≥ 6 (OR = 0,44; 95%CI: 0,25-0,81) and/or previous vaginal delivery after cesarean section (OR = 0,17; 95%CI: 0,08-0,35). CONCLUSION: With 47,9% of vaginal delivery after labor induction in women with scar uterus, only 3.8% (n = 7/353) of uterine ruptures, less than 1% APGAR < 7 at 5 min (n = 3/353), induction on scar uterus should be consider in obstetrical practice. Bishop score ≥ 6 and/or previous vaginal delivery after cesarean section are associated to vaginal delivery after labor induction.

Risk indicators for obstetrical anal sphincter injury in vaginal birth after caesarean section compared to first vaginal delivery.

OBJECTIVES: Comparison of the rate of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) between women having their first vaginal birth after caesarean section (CS) and true nulliparous women with a vaginal delivery. Assessment of risk indicators for OASI in women with vaginal birth after one CS (VBAC). STUDY DESIGN: 28 535 women with their first VBAC and a cohort of 275 439 nulliparous women with a vaginal delivery of a liveborn infant in a cephalic position from the Dutch perinatal registry were analyzed. We compared the OASI rate with univariate and multivariate analysis. In women with VBAC possible risk indicators for OASI were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The rate of OASI was 5.2% in women with vaginal birth after CS and 4.0% in women with a first vaginal delivery. The adjusted OR (aOR) for vaginal birth after an elective CS was higher (aOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.23-1.47) compared to vaginal birth after an emergency CS (aOR 1.16, 95% CI 1.08-1.25). In women with vaginal birth after emergency CS, the aOR for the indication non-progressive labor was 1.18 (95% CI 1.08-1.29), whereas CS for suspected fetal distress was not significantly associated with obstetric anal sphincter injury in VBAC. In the 28 535 women with a VBAC, mediolateral episiotomy (MLE), birth weight < 3000 g and maternal age < 25 years were associated with a significantly lower rate of OASI. A gestational age of 42 weeks, birth weight ≥ 3500 g, operative vaginal delivery and duration of the 2nd stage of labour of ≥ 60 min were associated with a significantly higher rate of OASI. CONCLUSIONS: Women with a VBAC have a higher rate of OASI in comparison with women with a first vaginal delivery, with the exception of women with a vaginal birth after an emergency CS for suspected fetal distress. Factors associated with a significantly lower rate for OASI were MLE, maternal age < 25 and birth weight < 3000 g. A gestational age of 42 weeks, birth weight between 3500 and 4000 g and ≥ 4000 g, operative vaginal delivery and duration of the 2nd stage of delivery longer dan 60 min were associated with a significantly higher rate of OASI.

Assessment of placenta accreta spectrum at vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Previous cesarean delivery is a risk factor for developing placenta accreta spectrum in a subsequent pregnancy and patients with antenatally suspected placenta accreta spectrum frequently undergo planned cesarean hysterectomy. There is a paucity of data regarding unsuspected placenta accreta spectrum among patients undergoing trial of labor after cesarean delivery for attempted vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the incidence, characteristics, and delivery outcomes of patients with placenta accreta spectrum diagnosed at the time of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's National Inpatient Sample was retrospectively queried to examine 184,415 patients with a history of low transverse cesarean delivery who had vaginal delivery in the current index hospital admission between 2017 and 2020. Those with placenta previa, previous vertical cesarean delivery, other uterine scars, and uterine rupture were excluded. This study identified placenta accreta spectrum cases using the World Health Organization International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, codes of O43.2. Coprimary outcomes were (1) the incidence rate of placenta accreta spectrum at vaginal birth after cesarean delivery; (2) clinical and pregnancy characteristics related to placenta accreta spectrum, assessed with multivariable binary logistic regression model; and (3) delivery outcomes associated with placenta accreta spectrum by fitting propensity score adjustment. The secondary outcome was to conduct a systematic literature review using 3 public search engines (PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus). Data on incidence rate and maternal morbidity related to placenta accreta spectrum at vaginal birth after cesarean delivery were evaluated. RESULTS: The incidence rate of placenta accreta spectrum at vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was 8.1 per 10,000 deliveries. Most placenta accreta spectrum cases were placenta accreta (83.3%). In a multivariable analysis, older maternal age, tobacco use, preeclampsia, multifetal pregnancy, fetal anomaly, preterm premature rupture of membrane, chorioamnionitis, low-lying placenta, and preterm delivery were associated with an increased risk of placenta accreta spectrum (all, P<.05). Of these factors, low-lying placenta had the largest odds for placenta accreta spectrum (526.3 vs 7.3 per 10,000 deliveries; adjusted odds ratio, 35.02; 95% confidence interval, 18.19-67.42). Patients in the placenta accreta spectrum group were more likely to have postpartum hemorrhage (80.0% vs 5.5%), blood product transfusion (23.3% vs 1.0%), shock or coagulopathy (20.0% vs 0.2%), and hysterectomy (43.3% vs <0.1%) than those without placenta accreta spectrum (all, P<.001). In a systematic literature review, a total of 212 studies were screened, and none of these studies examined the incidence and morbidity of placenta accreta spectrum at vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. CONCLUSION: This nationwide assessment suggests that although placenta accreta spectrum with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery is uncommon (1 of 1229 cases), the diagnosis of placenta accreta spectrum at vaginal birth after cesarean delivery is associated with significant maternal morbidity. In addition, the data suggest that low-lying placenta in the setting of previous low transverse cesarean delivery warrants careful evaluation for possible placenta accreta spectrum before a trial of labor.

Second stage duration and delivery outcomes among women laboring after cesarean with no prior vaginal delivery.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the association of the duration of the second stage with labor after cesarean (LAC) success and other outcomes among women with one prior cesarean delivery (CD) and no prior vaginal births. METHODS: All women undergoing LAC that reached the second stage of labor from March 2011 to March 2020 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome was the mode of delivery by second stage duration. The secondary outcomes included adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. We allocated the study cohort into five groups of second stage duration. Further analysis compared <3 to ≥3 h of second stage based on prior studies. LAC success rates were compared. Composite maternal outcome was defined as the presence of uterine rupture/dehiscence, postpartum hemorrhage, or intrapartum/postpartum fever. RESULTS: One thousand three hundred ninety seven deliveries were included. Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rates decreased as the second stage length time interval increased: 96.4% at <1 h, 94.9% at 1 to <2 h, 94.6% at 2 to <3 h, 92.1% at 3 to <4 h and 79.5% at ≥4 h (p < 0.001). Operative vaginal and CDs were significantly more likely as second stage duration time interval increased (p < 0.001). The composite maternal outcome was comparable among groups (p = 0.226). When comparing the outcomes of deliveries at <3 h versus ≥3 h, the composite maternal outcome and neonatal seizure rates were lower in the <3 h group (p = 0.041 and p = 0.047, respectively). CONCLUSION: Vaginal birth after cesarean rates decreased as second stage time interval length increased. Even with prolonged second stage, VBAC rates remained relatively high. Increased risk of composite adverse maternal outcomes and neonatal seizures were observed when the second stage lasted 3 h or more.

Predicting Uterine Rupture Risk Using Lower Uterine Segment Measurement During Pregnancy With Cesarean History: How Reliable Is It? A Review.

Importance: Uterine rupture during labor is a calamitous event that can result in maternal/neonatal morbidity/mortality. Lower uterine segment (LUS) thickness measurement is a proposed method to determine the risk factor of uterine rupture in women undergoing trial of labor after cesarean. Does this measurement predict uterine rupture risk? Objectives: This review examines current evidence to determine if a thin LUS ultrasound diagnosis during pregnancy with prior cesarean delivery(s) can reliably predict uterine rupture risk while attempting vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Evidence Acquisition: Electronic databases (PubMed and CINAHL) were searched with one limitation of abstracts in English. Search terms used were "lower uterine segment" AND "risk(s)" AND "rupture" OR "dehiscence. Results: After reviewing 164 identified articles, 15 were used in this review. Of the studies including LUS thickness measurement, notable differences were found: gestational age at time of measurement, full thickness measurement versus myometrial thickness, number of sonographers involved, ultrasound technique (transabdominal vs transvaginal), and blinding. Other factors influencing LUS thickness include fetal weight, amniotic fluid volume, and gestational age. The most recent systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that an LUS > 3.65 mm should be safe for a VBAC, 2-3.65 mm is probably safe, and <2 mm identifies a patient at higher risk for uterine rupture/dehiscence. Conclusions: Study heterogeneity, absence of an agreed upon thickness threshold, poor correlation between ultrasound and MRI measurements, or physical cesarean measurements currently make VBAC uterine rupture risk prediction uncertain. Relevance: Our aim is to analyze existing literature to determine if evidence supports LUS measurement in women undergoing VBAC after cesarean to determine risk of uterine rupture.

Cesarean scar niche, fertility and uterine rupture during labor - A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine how does a uterine niche diagnosed prior to conception, affects future fertility and obstetrical outcomes, in a group of patients with secondary infertility undergoing fertility treatments. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective case-control study was performed, recruiting patients after cesarean delivery, before fertility treatment. Using stored ultrasound photos and video loops, we determined niche's sonographic parameters during the preconception period and retrieved the fertility and obstetrical outcomes thereafter. RESULTS: 104 patients met the inclusion criteria, and 86 were available for analysis. 56 (65%) had uterine niches larger than 2 mm in depth, and 30 (34%) had a uterine scar of 2 mm or less. Demographic characteristics were not different between groups. No statistically significant differences were observed regarding rates of implantation and clinical pregnancy between the groups. There were four cases of cesarean scar rupture during failed trial of labor (TOLAC), all of which were in the group with larger than 2 mm niche (33% of all TOLAC cases in the respected group). CONCLUSIONS: While it appears that pre-conception presence of uterine niches larger than 2 mm in depth does not adversely affect future fertility, these niches might serve as a risk factor for future uterine rupture during TOLAC.

Delivery after a previous cesarean section reviewed.

At the start of the 20th century, cesarean section (CS) was uncommon in obstetrics. By the end of the century, CS rates had increased dramatically worldwide. Although the explanation for the increase is multifactorial, a major driver in the ongoing escalation is the increase in women who are delivered by repeat CS. This is due, in part, to the fact that there has been a sharp fall in vaginal birth after CS (VBAC) rates as fewer women are offered a trial of labor after CS (TOLAC), due principally to fears of a catastrophic intrapartum uterine rupture. This paper reviewed international VBAC policies and trends. A number of themes emerged. The risk of intrapartum rupture and its associated complications is low and may sometimes be overestimated. Individual maternity hospitals in both developed and developing countries are inadequately resourced to safely supervise a TOLAC. Efforts to mitigate the risks of TOLAC by careful patient selection and good clinical practices may be underutilized. Given the serious short-term and long-term consequences of rising CS rates for women and for maternity services generally, a review of TOLAC policies worldwide should be prioritized and consideration given to convening a Global Consensus Development Conference on Delivery after CS.

The safety of trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) versus elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Women's choice of birth following a cesarean delivery either includes a trial of elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) or a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). No comprehensive overview or systematic summary is currently available. METHODS: EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to 1 February 2020. Studies reporting the safety of TOLAC and ERCS in pregnant women with prior cesarean delivery were included. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.0. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were adopted as the effective measures. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies covering 676,532 cases were included in this meta-analysis. The results demonstrated that the rates of uterine rupture (OR = 3.35, 95%CI [1.57, 7.15], I2 = 81%), neonatal asphyxia (OR = 2.32, 95%CI [1.76, 3.08], I2 = 0%) and perinatal death (OR = 1.71, 95%CI [1.29, 2.25], I2 = 0%) were higher in the TOLAC group compared with the ERCS group. The rates of peripartum hysterectomy (OR = 0.70, 95%CI [0.44, 1.11], I2 = 62%), blood transfusion (OR = 1.24, 95%CI [0.72, 2.12], I2 = 95%), and puerperal infection (OR = 1.11, 95%CI [0.77, 1.60], I2 = 95%) showed no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSION: TOLAC is associated with a higher risk of uterine rupture, neonatal asphyxia, and perinatal death compared with ERCS. Nevertheless, it should be noted that the risks of all complications were small in both groups. This information is important for healthcare providers and women choosing the delivery type.

Grand multiparity, is it a help or a hindrance in a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC)?

OBJECTIVE: Parity is a prognostic variable when considering trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC). This study aimed to determine whether grandmultiparous patients are at increased risk of poor TOLAC outcomes such as uterine rupture. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort was conducted at a single university-affiliated medical center with approximately 10,000 deliveries per year. The study group included women post one cesarean section who attempted TOLAC carrying a singleton fetus in vertex presentation. We divided the cohort into three groups: group 1 - women who had a parity of 1; group 2 - parity of 2-4; group 3 - parity of 5 and above. The primary outcome was successful VBAC. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, uterine rupture, and combined maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. Data were analyzed using Fisher's exact test, Chi-square test, ANOVA, and paired t-test. RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred and forty-seven women comprised the study group: group 1 - 879 patients, group 2 - 2374 patients, and group 3 - 2194 patients. No significant between-group differences were found in gestational age at delivery. Rates of a successful VBAC were 80.6%, 95.4%, and 95.5%, respectively. Group 1 were more likely to have a failed TOLAC compared to group 2 (OR 5.02, 95% CI 3.9-6.5, p<.001) and group 3 (OR 5.17, 95% CI 4.0-6.7, p<.001). There was no increased risk of failed TOLAC when comparing groups 2 and 3 (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.8-1.4, p=.89). Operative delivery rate differed significantly between all three groups; 25.1%, 6.2%, and 3.6%, for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (p<.001). The rate of uterine rupture was significantly higher in group 1 compared to group 2 (1.02% vs. 0.29% p=.02) and group 3 (1.02% vs. 0.2%, p=.01, respectively). There were no differences between group 2 and group 3 (0.29% vs. 0.2% p=.78). CONCLUSIONS: Grandmultiparity is not associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture during TOLAC.

An innovative web-based decision-aid about birth after cesarean for shared decision making in Taiwan: study protocol for a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Taiwan has a high national caesarean rate coupled with a low vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) rate. This study aims to develop and evaluate a web-based decision-aid with communication support tools, to increase shared decision making (SDM) about birth after caesarean. METHODS: A quantitative approach will be adopted using a randomized pre-test and post-test experimental design in a medical centre in northern Taiwan. The web-based decision aid consists of five sections. Section 1 provides a two-part video to introduce SDM and how to participate in SDM. Section 2 presents an overview of functions and features of the birth decision-aid. Section 3 presents relevant VBAC information, including definitions, benefits and risks, and an artificial intelligence (AI) calculator for rate and likelihood of VBAC success. Section 4 presents the information regarding elective repeat caesarean delivery (ERCD), involving definitions, benefits, and risks. Section 5 comprises four steps of decision making to meet women's values and preferences. Pregnant women who have had one previous caesarean and are eligible for VBAC, will be recruited at 14-16 weeks. Participants will complete a baseline survey prior to random allocation to either the control group (usual care) or intervention group (usual care plus an AI-decision aid). A follow up survey at 35-38 weeks will measure change in decisional conflict, knowledge, birth mode preference, and decision-aid acceptability. Actual birth outcomes and satisfaction will be assessed one month after birth. DISCUSSION: The innovative web-based decision-aid with support tools will help to promote pregnant women's decision-making engagement and communication with their providers and improve opportunities for supportive communication about VBAC SDM in Taiwan. Linking web-based AI data analysis into the medical record will also be assessed for feasibility during implementation in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT05091944), Registered on October 24, 2021.

Trial of labor following cesarean in preterm deliveries: success rates and maternal and neonatal outcomes: a multicenter retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the rates of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) among parturients attempting preterm trial of labor following a cesarean delivery (TOLAC) vs. term TOLAC. METHODS: A multicenter historic cohort study was conducted at two university-affiliated centers between August 2005 and March 2021. Parturients in their second delivery, attempting TOLAC after a single low segment transverse cesarean delivery were included. We retrospectively examined computerized medical records of all preterm (< 37 weeks) and term (37-42 weeks) births. Multifetal gestations and postterm deliveries (≥ 42 weeks) were excluded. A univariate analysis was conducted, followed by a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: 4865 second deliveries following previous cesarean were identified: 212 (4.4%) preterm and 4653 (95.6%) term. Hypertensive disorders, diabetes and fertility treatments were significantly more prevalent in the preterm group. VBAC rate was significantly lower in preterm group (57.5 vs 79.7%., p < 0.01), including both spontaneous and vaginal-assisted deliveries. In multivariate analysis, preterm TOLAC was independently associated with TOLAC failure [adjusted odds ratio 2.24, [95% confidence interval 1.62-3.09]. Overall, maternal outcomes were favorable. Rates of uterine rupture, re-laparotomy and postpartum hemorrhage were comparable between groups. Neonatal outcomes were less favorable among the preterm group; however, preterm vs. term TOLAC was not associated with low 5 min Apgar score (aOR 1.76, 95% CI 0.92-3.40). CONCLUSION: In our study, VBAC rates were lower in preterm compared to term deliveries. Maternal outcomes were comparable. Neonatal outcomes were less favorable in the preterm group, more likely due to prematurity than delivery mode.

Attempted vaginal birth after cesarean: assessment of morbidity and predictors of success / Parto tras cesárea anterior: análisis de la morbimortalidad materno-fetal

Objective: Determining the appropriate approach for delivery after previous cesarean is a very controversial issue. Our objective was to establish whether pregnant women with a previous cesarean have an increased maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality after attempting vaginal delivery as well as to determine which factors may influence the achievement of a vaginal birth after cesarean. Materials and methods: A retrospective observational cohort study including 390 patients (196 cesarean group and 194 nulliparous group) was carried out. We compared neonatal and maternal outcomes between groups. Afterward, a multivariate logistic regression was applied for our second objective. Results: There were higher rates of uterine rupture (2% vs. 0%, p: 0.045) and puerperal hemorrhage (9.7% vs. 3.1%, p: 0.008) in the cesarean group and lower vaginal delivery rate (58.2% vs. 77.8%, p < 0.0005). We found that the induced onset of labor (OR = 2.9) and new born weight (OR = 1.0001) were associated with an increased risk of cesarean section. Conclusions: Our findings stress the need for further investigations in this field, which might provide a basis for a better management of patients with a previous cesarean.

Objetivo: Determinar el abordaje adecuado del tipo de parto tras una cesárea previa es un tema muy controvertido. Nuestro objetivo fue establecer si las gestantes con cesárea previa presentan mayor morbimortalidad materna y fetal tras intentar parto vaginal, así como determinar qué factores pueden influir en conseguir un parto vaginal posterior a la cesárea. Material y métodos: Estudio observacional de cohortes retrospectivo incluyendo 390 pacientes (196 con cesárea previa, 194 nulíparas). Comparamos los datos sobre los resultados neonatales y maternos. Posteriormente se aplicó un modelo de regresión logística multivariante. Resultados: Hubo mayores tasas de ruptura uterina (2% vs. 0%; p = 0.045) y hemorragia puerperal (9.7% vs. 3.1%, p: 0.008) en el grupo de cesárea anterior, así como una tasa de parto vaginal mas baja (58.2% vs. 77.8%, p < 0.0005). La inducción del parto (OR = 2,9) y el peso del recién nacido (OR = 1.0001) se asociaron a un mayor riesgo de cesárea. Conclusión: La probabilidad de parto vaginal en estas pacientes disminuye cuanto mayor sea el peso del recién nacido y con partos inducidos.

Maternal and neonatal outcomes of trial of labor compared with elective cesarean delivery according to predicted likelihood of vaginal delivery.

OBJECTIVE: The vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator developed by the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU) helps to identify the likelihood of VBAC. We sought to compare adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes of trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) to those of elective cesarean delivery after stratifying by VBAC likelihood. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of all women whose primary low transverse segment cesarean delivery and subsequent singleton term delivery with vertex presentation occurred at an academic center from January 2009 to June 2018. Only data from the second pregnancy were analyzed. The final analysis included 835 women. The MFMU VBAC calculator was used to assess the likelihood of VBAC. The two primary outcomes were composite adverse maternal (death or severe maternal complications) and neonatal outcomes (perinatal death or severe neonatal complications). The analyses were stratified based on the VBAC likelihood (less than 60% and 60-100%). Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI), controlling for predefined covariates. RESULTS: Among women with VBAC likelihood less than 60%, TOLAC compared with elective cesarean was associated with increased odds of the primary adverse maternal outcome (16.4% vs. 4.2%; adjusted OR 4.60 [95%CI 1.48-14.35]) and the primary adverse neonatal outcome (17.8% vs. 6.3%; adjusted OR 3.93 [95%CI 1.31-11.75]). Among women with VBAC likelihood of 60-100%, TOLAC compared with elective cesarean was associated with decreased odds of the primary adverse maternal outcome (6.4% vs. 11%; adjusted OR 0.47 [95%CI 0.25-0.89]) and similar odds of the primary adverse neonatal outcome (6.7% vs. 8.3%; adjusted OR 0.98 [95%CI 0.52-1.84]). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with a history of a primary low transverse cesarean delivery, those who underwent TOLAC compared to those who had elective cesarean had increased odds of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes when VBAC likelihood was less than 60%.