Vaginal birth after cesarean: to induce or not to induce.
prospective_cohort · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 11349175.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Our purpose was to determine the impact of labor induction on both the success and safety of a trial of labor in women who are candidates for vaginal birth after cesarean. We performed a prospective observational analysis of 505 women consecutively presenting for delivery with a prior cesarean (September 1997-December 1999), of whom 236 (46.7%) underwent trial of labor. The following three cohorts were established: (1) repeat cesarean without trial of labor (n = 269), (2) spontaneous trial of labor (n = 179), and (3) induced trial of labor (n = 57). The vaginal delivery rate was significantly higher (77.1% vs 57.9%) in the spontaneous labor group compared with the induced labor group (odds ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-4.82; P =.008). Uterine scar separation occurred more frequently in the induced labor group (7%) than in the elective repeat cesarean group (1.5%) (odds ratio, 0.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.99; P =.034). Induction of labor in women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean is associated with a significantly reduced rate of successful vaginal delivery and an increased risk of serious maternal morbidity.
Medical subject headings
- Labor, Induced
- Vaginal Birth after Cesarean