Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Trial of labor after caesarean section in low risk pregnancies: is it risky?
Kehl, Sven; Düster, Hanna; Weiss, Christel; Bader, Simon; Schneider, Michael; Beckmann, Matthias W; Dammer, Ulf; Pretscher, Jutta.
Afiliación
  • Kehl S; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, Universitätsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. sven.kehl@gmail.com.
  • Düster H; Department of Medical Statistics and Biomathematics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Weiss C; Department of Medical Statistics and Biomathematics, University Medical Center Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Heidelberg, Germany.
  • Bader S; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, Universitätsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
  • Schneider M; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, Universitätsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
  • Beckmann MW; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, Universitätsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
  • Dammer U; Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St. Theresien Hospital, Nuremberg, Germany.
  • Pretscher J; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erlangen University Hospital, Universitätsstr. 21-23, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Arch Gynecol Obstet ; 2024 Aug 29.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39207474
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To evaluate the influence of a previous caesarean section on adverse composite maternal and perinatal outcome in women who attempted a trial of labor.

METHODS:

This historical cohort study analyzed maternal and perinatal outcome in women with otherwise low risk pregnancies at term who underwent a trial of labor after a caesarean section (TOLAC). The primary outcome measure was the adverse composite outcome. Secondary outcome measures were amongst others the caesarean section rate and the mode of vaginal delivery.

RESULTS:

The adverse composite outcome was more frequently in the previous caesarean section group compared to women with no previous caesarean Sect. (22.3% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of caesarean Sect. (15.4% vs. 8.2%, p < 0,0001), uterine rupture (1.0% vs. 0.02%, p < 0.0001), placental abruption (1.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.0014), vaginal operative delivery (16.0% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.0001), pH < 7.10 (3.7% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0151), base excess < -12 (3.2% vs. 2.2%, p = 0.0297), abnormal cardiotocography (22.5% vs. 13.9%, p < 0,0001) and fetal blood analysis (6.2% vs. 2.6%, p < 0.0001) was significantly higher in women with a previous caesarean section. Taking the parity into account, these differences could only been seen in women without a previous vaginal delivery. In parous women with a previous vaginal delivery and a caesarean section in history, the adverse composite did not differ between the groups. Only the rate of pH < 7.1 was higher in women after a caesarean Sect. (4.5% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.0436).

CONCLUSION:

Trial of labor after caesarean in otherwise low risk pregnancies is associated with a higher rate of complications especially if there is no history of vaginal delivery.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Arch Gynecol Obstet Asunto de la revista: GINECOLOGIA / OBSTETRICIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania Pais de publicación: Alemania

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Arch Gynecol Obstet Asunto de la revista: GINECOLOGIA / OBSTETRICIA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania Pais de publicación: Alemania