Dataset Information

Outcomes of induction of labour in women with previous caesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study using a population database.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is evidence that induction of labour (IOL) around term reduces perinatal mortality and caesarean delivery rates when compared to expectant management of pregnancy (allowing the pregnancy to continue to await spontaneous labour or definitive indication for delivery). However, it is not clear whether IOL in women with a previous caesarean section confers the same benefits. The aim of this study was to describe outcomes of IOL at 39-41 weeks in women with one previous caesarean delivery and to compare outcomes of IOL or planned caesarean delivery to those of expectant management.

Methods and findings

We performed a population-based retrospective cohort study of singleton births greater than 39 weeks gestation, in women with one previous caesarean delivery, in Scotland, UK 1981-2007 (n?=?46,176). Outcomes included mode of delivery, perinatal mortality, neonatal unit admission, postpartum hemorrhage and uterine rupture. 40.1% (2,969/7,401) of women who underwent IOL 39-41 weeks were ultimately delivered by caesarean. When compared to expectant management IOL was associated with lower odds of caesarean delivery (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] after IOL at 39 weeks of 0.81 [95% CI 0.71-0.91]). There was no significant effect on the odds of perinatal mortality but greater odds of neonatal unit admission (AOR after IOL at 39 weeks of 1.29 [95% CI 1.08-1.55]). In contrast, when compared with expectant management, elective repeat caesarean delivery was associated with lower perinatal mortality (AOR after planned caesarean at 39 weeks of 0.23 [95% CI 0.07-0.75]) and, depending on gestation, the same or lower neonatal unit admission (AOR after planned caesarean at 39 weeks of 0.98 [0.90-1.07] at 40 weeks of 1.08 [0.94-1.23] and at 41 weeks of 0.77 [0.60-1.00]).

Conclusions

A more liberal policy of IOL in women with previous caesarean delivery may reduce repeat caesarean delivery, but increases the risks of neonatal complications.

SUBMITTER: Stock SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3615029 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outcomes of induction of labour in women with previous caesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study using a population database.

Stock Sarah J SJ Ferguson Evelyn E Duffy Andrew A Ford Ian I Chalmers James J Norman Jane E JE

PloS one 20130402 4

<h4>Background</h4>There is evidence that induction of labour (IOL) around term reduces perinatal mortality and caesarean delivery rates when compared to expectant management of pregnancy (allowing the pregnancy to continue to await spontaneous labour or definitive indication for delivery). However, it is not clear whether IOL in women with a previous caesarean section confers the same benefits. The aim of this study was to describe outcomes of IOL at 39-41 weeks in women with one previous caesa ...[more]

PMID: 23565242

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundElective repeat caesarean delivery (ERCD) rates have been increasing worldwide, thus prompting obstetric discourse on the risks and benefits for the mother and infant. Yet, these increasing rates also have major economic implications for the health care system. Given the dearth of information on the cost-effectiveness related to mode of delivery, the aim of this paper was to perform an economic evaluation on the costs and short-term maternal health consequences associated with a trial of labour after one previous caesarean delivery compared with ERCD for low risk women in Ireland.MethodsUsing a decision analytic model, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed where the measure of health gain was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a six-week time horizon. A review of international literature was conducted to derive representative estimates of adverse maternal health outcomes following a trial of labour after caesarean (TOLAC) and ERCD. Delivery/procedure costs derived from primary data collection and combined both "bottom-up" and "top-down" costing estimations.ResultsMaternal morbidities emerged in twice as many cases in the TOLAC group than the ERCD group. However, a TOLAC was found to be the most-effective method of delivery because it was substantially less expensive than ERCD (€ 1,835.06 versus € 4,039.87 per women, respectively), and QALYs were modestly higher (0.84 versus 0.70). Our findings were supported by probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ConclusionsClinicians need to be well informed of the benefits and risks of TOLAC among low risk women. Ideally, clinician-patient discourse would address differences in length of hospital stay and postpartum recovery time. While it is premature advocate a policy of TOLAC across maternity units, the results of the study prompt further analysis and repeat iterations, encouraging future studies to synthesis previous research and new and relevant evidence under a single comprehensive decision model.

Project description:Background:During the last decades, the rate of caesarean section is increasing and this can increase the mortality and morbidity. Up to one third of the caesarean sections are attributed to the elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS). This study aims to evaluate attitudes and factors affecting the choice of pregnant women with one previous caesarean section regarding their mode of delivery in their second pregnancy. By assessing these attitudes, this study can help the efforts in developing strategies to increase the rates of vaginal delivery. Material and methods:A cross-sectional design was conducted by a structured questionnaire on 166 pregnant women who had delivered once by caesarean section for their first pregnancy and were in the third trimester of their second pregnancy. Any women with an absolute indication for caesarean section was excluded. The study comprises women who attend the clinic at our center in Northern of Jordan. Proper statistical tests were performed to assess the association between the choice of delivery and selected demographic and clinical factors. Results:About 55.4% responded that they would choose ERCS (n = 92) and the remaining participants chose trial of labour after caesarean section (TOLAC) (n = 74). Fear of pain was the most common reason for choosing caesarean section, accounting for 55.4%. Interestingly, our study did not show a significant association between the mode of delivery and demographic factors, such as age, educational level and occupation. The single independent significant factor influencing patients' choice that our study revealed was "being informed about the complications of TOLAC". The choice of TOLAC was almost four times higher for those participants who had been informed about the complications, compared to those who had not been informed. Conclusion:Proper counselling is a main factor that affected the patients' choice toward the mode of delivery. Proper pain management may encourage patients to choose TOLAC because fear of pain was a main reason that patients requested ERCS instead of TOLAC.

Project description:BackgroundThe rising rates of primary caesarean section have resulted in a larger obstetric population with scarred uteri. Subsequent pregnancies in these women are risk-prone and may complicate. Besides ensuring standardised management, care pathways could be used to evaluate for perinatal outcomes in these high risk pregnancies. We aim to demonstrate the use of a care pathway for vaginal birth after caesarean section as a service evaluation tool to determine perinatal outcomes.MethodsA retrospective service evaluation by review of delivery case notes and records was undertaken at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya between January 2008 and December 2009. Women with ?2 previous caesarean sections, previous classical caesarean section, multiple gestation, breech presentation, severe pre-eclampsia, transverse lie, placenta praevia, conditions requiring induction of labour and incomplete records were excluded. Outcome measures included the proportion of eligible women who opted for test of scar (ToS), success rate of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC); proportion on women opting for elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS) and their perinatal outcomes.ResultsA total of 215 women with one previous caesarean section were followed up using a standard care pathway. The median parity (minimum-maximum) was 1.01234. The other demographic characteristics were comparable. Only 44.6% of eligible mothers opted to have a ToS. The success rate for VBAC was 49.4% with the commonest (31.8%) reason for failure being protracted active phase of labour. Maternal morbidity was comparable for the failed and successful VBAC group. The incidence of hemorrhage was 2.3% and 4.4% for the successful and failed VBAC groups respectively. The proportion of babies with acidotic arterial PH (< 7.10) was 3.1% and 22.2% among the successful and failed VBAC groups respectively. No perinatal mortality was reported.ConclusionsBesides ensuring standardised management, care pathways could be objective audit and service evaluation tools for determining perinatal outcomes.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The safety of methods of labor induction in women with previous cesarean deliveries is still debated. We investigated perinatal outcomes associated with labor induction among women with a trial of labor after one cesarean delivery. METHODS:This retrospective study included 339 women with a trial of labor after one prior cesarean and a singleton term fetus in cephalic presentation in 2013-2016 in a French maternity unit. Labor induction was performed with oxytocin, artificial rupture of membranes and/or prostaglandin E2, according to the Bishop score. The primary outcome was a composite of uterine rupture, low Apgar score, neonatal resuscitation or admission to a neonatal unit. The secondary outcomes included cesarean delivery after onset of labor, postpartum hemorrhage and maternal hospital stay after delivery. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios adjusted (aOR) for potential confounders. RESULTS:In our sample, 67.3% of women had spontaneous labor and 32.7% were induced. More than half of the women received oxytocin during labor regardless of the mode of labor. The proportions of the composite outcome and of cesarean after onset of labor were higher in the induced group compared to the spontaneous group (26.1% vs 15.8%, p = 0.02 and 45.0% vs 27.6%, p<0.01, respectively). There were 9 uterine ruptures (2.6%) and this proportion was higher in the induced group compared to the spontaneous group, although this difference was not statistically significant (3.6% vs 2.2%, p = 0.48). After adjustment, labor induction was associated with higher risks of the composite outcome (aOR = 2.45, 95% CI: 1.29-4.65), cesarean after onset of labor (aOR = 2.06, 95% CI: 1.15-3.68) and maternal hospital stay after delivery ?6 days (aOR = 6.20, 95% CI: 3.25-11.81). No association was found with postpartum hemorrhage. CONCLUSION:Labor induction after one prior cesarean was associated with a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcome. Nevertheless, the higher proportion of uterine rupture did not differ significantly from that in the spontaneous labor group.

Dataset Information

Outcomes of induction of labour in women with previous caesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study using a population database.

Background

Methods and findings

Conclusions

Publications

Outcomes of induction of labour in women with previous caesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study using a population database.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets