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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Induction of labor in twin pregnancy in patients with a previous cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) in twin gestations has been associated with decreased rates of successful vaginal delivery compared to singleton pregnancies, with mixed results regarding maternal and neonatal morbidity. However, induction of labor (IOL) in this unique population has not yet been fully evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To assess success rates and maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with a twin gestation and a previous cesarean delivery undergoing IOL. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study including women with a twin gestation and one previous cesarean delivery undergoing a trial of labor between the years 2009-2020. Patients requiring IOL were compared to those with a spontaneous onset of labor. RESULTS: There were 53 patients who met the inclusion criteria: 31 had a spontaneous onset of labor (58%) and 22 required an IOL. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups apart from a history of labor arrest which was more common in the IOL group (40.9% vs. 9.6%, P = 0.006). A successful vaginal delivery occurred in all (100%) women with a spontaneous labor compared to 81% in the IOL group (p = 0.02). Secondary outcomes were comparable. A history of no previous vaginal delivery, maternal obesity, and IOL were associated with TOLAC failure. CONCLUSIONS: IOL after cesarean delivery in twin gestation is associated with an increased risk of TOLAC failure compared to spontaneous onset of labor. However, no adverse neonatal or maternal outcomes were found. IOL in this high-risk population is feasible but patients should be counseled about the lower rate of success.

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.

An exploration of barriers to access to trial of labor and vaginal birth after cesarean in the United States: a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing the number of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries is one strategy to reduce the cesarean rate in the United States. Despite evidence of its safety, access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and VBAC are limited by many clinical and non-clinical factors. We used a scoping review methodology to identify barriers to access of TOLAC and VBAC in the United States and extract potential leverage points from the literature. CONTENT: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published after 1990, focusing on access to TOLAC and/or VBAC in the United States. Themes and potential leverage points were mapped onto the Minority Health and Health Disparities Research Framework. The search yielded 21 peer-reviewed papers. SUMMARY: Barriers varied across levels of influence and included factors related to restrictive clinical guidelines, provider reluctance, geographic disparities, and midwifery scopes of practice. While barriers varied in levels of influence, the majority were related to systemic and interpersonal factors. OUTLOOK: Barriers to TOLAC and VBAC exist at many levels and are both clinical and non-clinical in nature. The existing body of literature can benefit from more research examining the impact of recent revisions to clinical guidelines related to VBAC as well as additional qualitative studies to more deeply understand the complexity of provider reluctance.

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.

The rates of vaginal births after cesarean section have increased during the last decades: a nationwide register-based cohort study in Finland.

PURPOSE: Epidemiological studies assessing the effects of previous cesarean section (CS) on subsequent delivery mode using large nationwide study populations. This study aims to calculate the incidence rates of trial of labors after cesarean section (TOLACs) and evaluate the annual rates of vaginal births after cesarean section (VBAC) during the last decades in Finland. METHODS: Data from the National Medical Birth Register (MBR) were used to evaluate incidence rates of VABC in the Finnish population (1998-2018). All nulliparous women having their first and second pregnancy during our study period, and with the mode of delivery identified in both of these pregnancies were included in this study. Absolute annual numbers and incidence rates for TOLACs, elective CS, and VBAC were calculated. RESULTS: The absolute number of TOLACs had an increasing trend during our study period, increasing up to 2118 TOLACs in 2016. The incidence rates for elective CS after the first CS had a decreasing trend, decreasing from 45% in 1999, to 28% in 2018. The absolute number of VBACs had an increasing trend during our study period, peaking in 2016 (1466 VBACs). The rates for VBAC remained relatively constant, ranging between 38 and 52%, but a slightly increasing trend at the end of the study period was seen. CONCLUSION: Despite the increasing annual total number of deliveries with CS in the first pregnancy, the absolute numbers and rates for VBACs have increased towards the end of the study period in Finland. The epidemiology of TOLACs and VBACs should be better studied around the world, as with the rapidly increasing rate of CSs, these events are becoming more common challenges in health care.

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.

Outcome of subsequent pregnancies in women with complete uterine rupture: A population-based case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: In the attempt of a trial of labor after a cesarean section approximately one in 200 women experience a complete uterine rupture. As a complete uterine rupture is associated with an adverse perinatal outcome, data regarding subsequent pregnancies are needed to provide proper care and guidance to women with a complete uterine rupture when informing them of future possibilities. The objective of this study was to investigate the fetal and maternal outcomes in subsequent pregnancies after a complete uterine rupture. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective population-based case-control study. Denmark 1997-2017. A total of 175 women with complete uterine rupture during an attempted trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) at term (cases) and a corresponding group of 272 women with no uterine rupture during an attempted TOLAC at term (controls) were labeled as index deliveries. Index deliveries were included from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2008. From the date of the index delivery to December 31, 2017 the information on subsequent pregnancies and deliveries, and on referral to hospital with any obstetric or gynecological diagnosis were retrieved from the Danish Medical Birth Registry and National Patient Registry. Main outcome measures were miscarriage, perinatal death, neonatal morbidity, preterm birth, and recurrence of uterine rupture. Outcome measures were compared between cases and controls. RESULTS: After the index deliveries; there were 109 pregnancies and 70 deliveries after gestational age 22+0  weeks in the population of cases. In the population of controls, there were 183 pregnancies and 126 deliveries after 22+0  weeks. Cases had a significantly higher risk of miscarriage (odds ratio [OR] 3.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36-13.17). The incidence of uterine rupture was 8.6% among cases and 0.8% among controls (OR 11.7; 95% CI 1.36-543.1). Among cases, 98.6% had live-born infants, and none of these had severe neonatal morbidity. No significant association was found between previous complete uterine rupture and preterm delivery, placenta previa, hysterectomy in relation to subsequent births, diagnosis such as meno/metrorrhagia, dysmenorrhea, or procedures such as hysteroscopy or hysterectomy. CONCLUSIONS: In pregnancies following complete uterine rupture continuing after 22+0  weeks, maternal and fetal outcomes are good when managed promptly with cesarean delivery.

Artificial rupture of membranes as a mode for induction of labor in women with a previous cesarean section- a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Induction of labor in women with a previous cesarean section (CS) is associated with increased rates of uterine rupture and failed attempt for vaginal delivery. Prostaglandins use is contraindicated in this population, limiting available options for cervical ripening. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of artificial rupture of membranes (AROM) as a mode of Induction of labor (IOL) in women with a previous cesarean section. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study conducted in a single tertiary care center between January 2015 and October 2020. Women with one previous cesarean section and a current singleton term pregnancy requiring IOL, with an unfavorable cervix, were included. The primary outcome was a successful vaginal delivery (VBAC); secondary outcomes were rates of chorioamnionitis, uterine rupture and low Apgar score (< 7). RESULTS: Of the 665 women who met the inclusion criteria, 492 (74%) did not receive subsequent oxytocin and 173 (26%) did. There were significant differences in the baseline characteristics between these two groups, including maternal age, cervical dilation at presentation, parity, and a history of a previous VBAC. Among women who were induced solely by AROM the rate of a successful TOLAC was higher (81.3% vs 73.9%), total time of IOL was shorter (mean 8.7 h vs.16.1 h) and the risk of chorioamnionitis was lower (7.3% vs 18.4%). When subdividing the women who received oxytocin into early (< 12 h after AROM) vs late (> 12 h after AROM) administration, there were no significant changes in the rates of successful VBAC or of chorioamnionitis. CONCLUSION: AROM as a single mode of IOL in women with a previous CS is a safe and efficient practice with high rates of successful VBAC. When spontaneous labor does not develop, there is no advantage to delay the administration of oxytocin.

Is there an optimal inter-delivery interval in women who underwent trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC)?

BACKGROUND: Inter-delivery interval (IDI) has been proven to be a factor associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, the optimal IDI in trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the association between IDI and major maternal and neonatal outcomes in women who underwent TOLAC. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study including five hospitals was conducted between January 2018 and December 2019 in Foshan, China. This study included 1080 pregnant women with one or two cesarean deliveries who attempted a TOLAC. Data on maternal and neonatal outcomes were collected from the electronic record system. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in different groups of IDI were compared by univariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A short IDI of < 24 months did not show a statistically significant association with uterine rupture in the univariate analysis (P = 0.668). In multivariable analysis, the incidences of postpartum hemorrhage (OR 19.6, 95% CI:4.4-90.9, P < 0.05), preterm birth (OR 5.5, 95% CI:1.5-21.3, P < 0.05), and low birth weight (OR 3.5, 95% CI:1.2-10.3, P < 0.05) were significantly increased in women with an IDI of < 24 months than in those with a normal interval (24-59 months). Infection morbidity (OR 1.8, 95% CI:1.4-7.9, P < 0.05), transfusion (OR 7.4, 95% CI:1.4-40.0, P < 0.05), and neonatal unit admission (OR 2.6, 95% CI:1.4-5.0, P < 0.05) were significantly increased in women with an IDI of 120 months or more than in those with a normal interval. Postpartum hemorrhage (P = 0.062) had a trend similar to that of a significant IDI of 120 months or more. We found no statistically significant difference in maternal and neonatal outcomes between 24-59 months and 60-119 months. CONCLUSIONS: An IDI of less than 24 months or 120 months or more increased the risk of major maternal and neonatal outcomes. We recommend that the optimal interval for women who underwent TOLAC should be 24 to 119 months.

An inter-delivery interval (IDI) that is too short or too long increases the risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, the optimal IDI for trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) remains unclear. We performed a multicenter, electronic medical record-based, retrospective cohort study that included 1080 pregnant women who had one or two cesarean deliveries and underwent TOLAC. Data on maternal and neonatal outcomes were collected from the electronic record system. In multivariable analysis, the incidences of postpartum hemorrhage, preterm birth, and low birth weight were significantly increased in women with an IDI of < 24 months than in those with a normal interval (24­59 months). Infections, transfusion, and neonatal unit admission were significantly increased in women with an IDI of ≥ 120 months than in those with a normal interval. In conclusion, we found that an IDI < 24 months or ≥ 120 months increased the risk of major maternal and neonatal outcomes. We recommend that the optimal interval for women who underwent TOLAC should be 24 to 119 months.

Sonographic fetal head circumference is associated with trial of labor after cesarean section success.

PURPOSE: The purpose is to study the association of the fetal sonographic head circumference (SHC) with trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) success rate, among women with no prior vaginal deliveries. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study including all women with no prior vaginal delivery undergoing TOLAC during 3/2011-6/2020 with a sonographic estimated fetal weight within one week from delivery. TOLAC success and failure groups were compared. RESULTS: Of 1232 included women, 948 (76.9%) delivered vaginally. The mean fetal SHC was smaller in the TOLAC success group (330 ± 10 vs. 333 ± 11 mm, p < 0.001). In a multivariate regression analysis, predelivery BMI, hypertensive disorders, gestational age at prior CD, SHC and epidural analgesia administration were independently associated with TOLAC success. A ROC analysis of the multivariable model composed of the factors found independently associated with TOLAC success, excluding SHC, yielded an area under curve of 0.659 (95% CI 0.622-0.697) compared with 0.668 (95% CI 0.630-0.705) with SHC included. CONCLUSION: Smaller SHC is independently associated with TOLAC success among women that did not deliver vaginally before, and has additive clinical value for the prediction of TOLAC success when combined with non-sonographic factors.

Risk factors and outcomes associated with type of uterine rupture.

PURPOSE: To identify risk factors associated with the occurrence of complete uterine rupture (CUR) in comparison to partial uterine rupture (PUR) to further investigate to what extent a standardized definition is needed and what clinical implications can be drawn. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2017 cases with CUR and PUR at Charité University Berlin, Germany were retrospectively identified. Demographic, obstetric and outcome variables were analyzed regarding the type of rupture. Binary multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify risk factors associated with CUR. In addition, the intended route of delivery (trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) and elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD)), divided according to the type of rupture, was compared. RESULTS: 92 cases with uterine rupture were identified out of a total of 64.063 births (0.14%). Puerperal complications were more frequent in CUR (67.9 versus 41.1%, p = 0.021). Multiparity ≥ 3 was more frequent in CUR (31 versus 10.7%, p = 0.020). Factors increasing the risk for CUR were parity ≥ 3 (OR = 3.8, p = 0.025), previous vaginal birth (OR = 4.4, p = 0.011), TOLAC (OR = 6.5, p < 0.001) and the use of oxytocin (OR = 2.9, p = 0.036). After multivariate analysis, the only independent risk factor associated with CUR was TOLAC (OR = 7.4, p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: TOLAC is the only independent risk factor for CUR. After optimized antenatal counselling TOLAC and ERCD had comparable short-term maternal and fetal outcomes in a high resource setting. A high number of previous vaginal births does not eliminate the risk of uterine rupture. A clear distinction between CUR and PUR is essential to ensure comparability among studies.

Prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in term gestations: a calculator without race and ethnicity.

BACKGROUND: Investigators have attempted to derive tools that could provide clinicians with an easily obtainable estimate of the chance of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery for those who undertake trial of labor after cesarean delivery. One tool that has been validated externally was derived from data from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Cesarean Registry. However, concern has been raised that this tool includes the socially constructed variables of race and ethnicity. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop an accurate tool to predict vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, using data easily obtainable early in pregnancy, without the inclusion of race and ethnicity. STUDY DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of the Cesarean Registry of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The approach to the current analysis is similar to that of the analysis in which the previous vaginal birth after cesarean delivery prediction tool was derived. Specifically, individuals were included in this analysis if they were delivered on or after 37 0/7 weeks' gestation with a live singleton cephalic fetus at the time of labor and delivery admission, had a trial of labor after cesarean delivery, and had a history of 1 previous low-transverse cesarean delivery. Information was only considered for inclusion in the model if it was ascertainable at an initial prenatal visit. Model selection and internal validation were performed using a cross-validation procedure, with the dataset randomly and equally divided into a training set and a test set. The training set was used to identify factors associated with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery and build the logistic regression predictive model using stepwise backward elimination. A final model was generated that included all variables found to be significant (P<.05). The accuracy of the model to predict vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was assessed using the concordance index. The independent test set was used to estimate classification errors and validate the model that had been developed from the training set, and calibration was assessed. The final model was then applied to the overall analytical population. RESULTS: Of the 11,687 individuals who met the inclusion criteria for this secondary analysis, 8636 (74%) experienced vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. The backward elimination variable selection yielded a model from the training set that included maternal age, prepregnancy weight, height, indication for previous cesarean delivery, obstetrical history, and chronic hypertension. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was significantly more likely for women who were taller and had a previous vaginal birth, particularly if that vaginal birth had occurred after a previous cesarean delivery. Conversely, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery was significantly less likely for women whose age was older, whose weight was heavier, whose indication for previous cesarean delivery was arrest of dilation or descent, and who had a history of medication-treated chronic hypertension. The model had excellent calibration between predicted and empirical probabilities and, when applied to the overall analytical population, an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.75 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.77), which is similar to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the previous model (0.75) that included race and ethnicity. CONCLUSION: We successfully derived an accurate model (available at https://mfmunetwork.bsc.gwu.edu/web/mfmunetwork/vaginal-birth-after-cesarean-calculator), which did not include race or ethnicity, for the estimation of the probability of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.

Predicting obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in patients who undergo vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Women with a history of previous cesarean delivery must weigh the numerous potential risks and benefits of elective repeat cesarean delivery or trial of labor after cesarean delivery. Notably, 1 important risk of vaginal delivery is obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. Furthermore, the rate of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries is high among women undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. However, the risk of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries is not routinely included in the trial of labor after cesarean delivery counseling, and there is no tool available to risk stratify obstetrical anal sphincter injuries among women undergoing vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and validate a predictive model to estimate the risk of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in the setting of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery population to improve antenatal counseling of patients regarding risks of trial of labor after cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This study was a secondary subgroup analysis of the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Trial of Labor After Cesarean Delivery prospective cohort (1999-2002). We identified women within the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network cohort with 1 previous cesarean delivery followed by a term vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. This Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery cohort was stratified into 2 groups based on the presence of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries, and baseline characteristics were compared with bivariate analysis. Significant covariates in bivariate testing were included in a backward stepwise logistic regression model to identify independent risk factors for obstetrical anal sphincter injuries and generate a predictive model for obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in the setting of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Internal validation was performed using bootstrapped bias-corrected estimates of model concordance indices, Brier scores, Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-squared values, and calibration plots. External validation was performed using data from a single-site retrospective cohort of women with a singleton vaginal birth after cesarean delivery from January 2011 to December 2016. RESULTS: In this study, 10,697 women in the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Trial of Labor After Cesarean Delivery cohort met the inclusion criteria, and 669 women (6.3%) experienced obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. In the model, factors independently associated with obstetrical anal sphincter injuries included use of forceps (adjusted odds ratio, 5.08; 95% confidence interval, 4.10-6.31) and vacuum assistance (adjusted odds ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 2.02-3.44), along with increasing maternal age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.07 per year), body mass index (adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.00 per unit kg/m2), previous vaginal delivery (adjusted odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.23), and tobacco use during pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.82). Internal validation demonstrated appropriate discrimination (concordance index, 0.790; 95% confidence interval, 0.771-0.808) and calibration (Brier score, 0.047). External validation used data from 1266 women who delivered at a tertiary healthcare system, with appropriate model discrimination (concordance index, 0.791; 95% confidence interval, 0.735-0.846) and calibration (Brier score, 0.046). The model can be accessed at oasisriskscore.xyz. CONCLUSION: Our model provided a robust, validated estimate of the probability of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries during vaginal birth after cesarean delivery using known antenatal risk factors and 1 modifiable intrapartum risk factor and can be used to counsel patients regarding risks of trial of labor after cesarean delivery compared with risks of elective repeat cesarean delivery.

Obstetricians' perspectives on trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) under the two-child policy in China: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: As the birth policy has been adjusted from one-child-one-couple to universal two-child-one-couple in China, there is an increasing number of women undergoing a second pregnancy after a previous cesarean section (CS). Undertaking an elective repeat CS (ERCS) has been taken for granted and has thus become a major contributor to the increasing CS rate in China. Promoting trial of labor after CS (TOLAC) can reduce the CS rate without compromising delivery outcomes. This study aimed to investigate Chinese obstetricians' perspectives regarding TOLAC, and the factors associated with their decision-making regarding recommending TOLAC to pregnant women with a history of CS under the two-child policy. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out between May and July 2018. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the factors associated with the obstetricians' intention to recommend TOLAC to pregnant women with a history of CS. The independent variables included sociodemographic factors and perceptions regarding TOLAC (selection criteria for TOLAC, basis underlying the selection criteria for TOLAC, and perceived challenges regarding promoting TOLAC). RESULTS: A total of 426 obstetricians were surveyed, with a response rate of ≥83%. The results showed that 31.0% of the obstetricians had no intention to recommend TOLAC to pregnant women with a history of CS. Their decisions were associated with the perceived lack of confidence regarding undergoing TOLAC among pregnant women with a history of CS and their families (odds ratio [OR] = 2.31; 95% CI: 1.38-1.38); obstetricians' uncertainty about the safety of TOLAC for pregnant women with a history of CS (OR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.27-0.96), and worries about medical lawsuits due to adverse delivery outcomes (OR = 0.14; 95% CI: 0.07-0.31). The main reported challenges regarding performing TOLAC were lack of clear guidelines for predicting or avoiding the risks associated with TOLAC (83.4%), obstetricians' uncertainty about the safety of TOLAC for women with a history of CS (81.2%), pregnant women's unwillingness to accept the risks associated with TOLAC (81.0%) or demand for ERCS (80.7%), and the perceived lack of confidence (77.5%) or understanding (69.7%) regarding undergoing TOLAC among pregnant women and their families. CONCLUSION: A proportion of Chinese obstetricians did not intend to recommend TOLAC to pregnant women with a history of CS. This phenomenon was closely associated with obstetricians' concerns about TOLAC safety and perceived attitudes of the pregnant women and their families regarding TOLAC. Effective measures are needed to help obstetricians predict and reduce the risks associated with TOLAC, clearly specify the indications for TOLAC, improve labor management, and popularize TOLAC in China. Additionally, public health education on TOLAC is necessary to improve the understanding of TOLAC among pregnant women with a history of CS and their families, and to improve their interactions with their obstetricians regarding shared decision making.

Patient decision aid for trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) versus planned repeat cesarean delivery: a quasi-experimental pre-post study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of a web-based decision aid on patient-centered decision making outcomes among women considering a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) versus planned repeat cesarean delivery. METHODS: The Birth Decision Aid Study (B-READY) was a quasi-experimental pre-post study of two sequential cohorts. From June 18, 2018 to July 31, 2019, 50 women were enrolled in routine care, followed by 50 women who were enrolled in the decision aid group. Inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancies between 19/0 to 36/6 weeks, ≤2 prior cesareans, and no contraindications to TOLAC. The decision aid group viewed the online Healthwise® "Pregnancy: Birth Options After Cesarean" program. Both groups received the same birth options counseling and completed the same online assessment. Primary patient-centered outcomes were knowledge about birth options and shared decision making at online assessment, and informed, patient-centered decision making about her preferred mode of delivery at delivery admission. RESULTS: Among 100 women participated in this study (50 per group), the mean gestational age at enrollment was 31 weeks, and 71% or 63/89 women who consented to delivery data abstraction had a cesarean delivery. Women in the patient decision aid group gained more knowledge (defined as score ≥ 75%) about birth options compared to those in the routine care group (72% vs. 32%; adjusted odds ratio, AOR: 6.15 [95% CI: 2.34 to 16.14]), and were more likely to make an informed, patient-centered decision (60% vs. 26%; AOR: 3.30 [95% CI: 1.20 to 9.04]. Women in both groups reported similar involvement in shared decision making, as well as satisfaction and values. More than 90% of decision aid users reported it was a useful tool and would recommend it to other TOLAC-eligible women. CONCLUSIONS: A web-based birth options patient-centered decision aid for TOLAC eligible women can be integrated into prenatal Telehealth and may improve the quality of decision making about mode of delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered with ClinincalTrials.gov and the ID# was NCT04053413 . Registered 12 August 2019 - Retrospectively registered.