剖宫产后阴道试产失败的影响因素分析

目的:探讨剖宫产后阴道试产(TOLAC)失败的影响因素。方法:回顾性分析2017年1月至2020年12月在首都医科大学附属北京积水潭医院妇产科住院分娩的TOLAC患者的病例资料共174例。根据此次分娩结局分为剖宫产后阴道分娩(VBAC)组(122例)和TOLAC失败组(52例),对两组的一般资料进行单因素分析，对TOLAC失败的影响因素进行Logistic回归分析；再根据此次分娩是否自然临产，分为自然临产组(124例)和引产组(50例),比较两组在TOLAC失败率上是否有差异；分析引产组中VBAC(26例)和TOLAC失败者(24例)一般资料的差异性；分析TOLAC失败组中自然临产(28例)和引产者(24例)的再次剖宫产指征构成比有无差异。结果:VBAC组与TOLAC失败组在分娩孕周[39⁺³(38⁺⁵,40⁺¹)周vs.40⁺¹(39⁺²,40⁺⁴)周，P=0.002]、新生儿出生体质量(3308.44±451.57 g vs.3469.23±334.0...     

剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道分娩的安全性及影响因素分析

目的探讨剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道分娩的安全性及其影响因素。 方法回顾性分析2017年1月至2018年10月在佛山市妇幼保健院住院分娩的剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道试产孕妇的临床资料。按照是否成功经阴道分娩分成剖宫产后阴道分娩(vaginal birth after cesarean section, VBAC)组和剖宫产后阴道试产(trial of labor after cesarean,TOLAC)失败组,比较VBAC组和TOLAC失败组患者的妊娠结局,采用多因素Logistic回归分析方法分析VBAC的影响因素。 结果(1)2017年1月至2018年10月共纳入TOLAC研究的孕妇共323例,其中VBAC率为80.2%(259/323),TOLAC失败率为19.8%(64/323);子宫破裂发生率为0.62%(2/323),均为TOLAC失败组;两组患者均无子宫切除。(2)VBAC组和TOLAC失败组比较,VBAC组头盆评分(7.77±1.15)分,高于TOLAC失败组(7.16±0.70)分,(t＝4.891,P<0.001);TOLAC失败组产前阴道出血率6.3%(4/64),高于VBAC组1.2%(3/259),P＝0.033;两组的Bishop评分、羊水指数、羊水最深均没有统计学差异(P>0.05)。(3)TOLAC失败组产后出血≥500 ml的比例为51.6%(33/64),高于VBAC组的2.8%(7/259),( χ²＝105.500,P<0.001);TOLAC失败组子宫破裂率3.2%(2/64),高于VBAC组(0/259),( χ²＝8.144,P＝0.017);但两组间产后出血≥1000 ml的比例、输血率没有统计学差异(P>0.05)。(4)VBAC组的分娩孕周、新生儿出生体重、身长、头围和胸围均低于TOLAC失败组,1 min Apgar评分高于TOLAC失败组且具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。(5)多因素分析显示,孕妇的头盆评分(OR＝0.610, 95%CI：0.420～0.887,P＝0.010)、新生儿出生体重3500～3999 g(OR＝4.783, 95%CI：1.431～15.989,P＝0.011)和新生儿出生体重≥4000 g(OR＝16.042, 95%CI：1.306～196.983,P＝0.030)是VBAC的独立影响因素。 结论在严格的纳入排除标准、系统的产前评估和严密的产程管理下,TOLAC是安全可行的,VBAC成功率也较高。多因素分析显示,头盆评分和胎儿出生体重是VBAC的独立影响因素。     

剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道分娩的安全性探讨

目的:探讨剖宫产术后再次妊娠行阴道分娩(VBAC)的安全性。方法:回顾性分析收治的剖宫产术后再次妊娠、符合剖宫产术后阴道试产(TOLAC)适应证、无TOLAC禁忌证的363例孕妇的临床资料,根据患者意愿158例孕妇愿意行TOLAC,其中自然临产44例(自然临产组),Bishop≥6分行缩宫素静滴引产81例(宫颈成熟组),Bishop6分行Cook双球囊放置术促宫颈成熟后行缩宫素静滴引产33例(宫颈不成熟组),并按照最终的分娩方式分为TOLAC成功137例(VBAC组)、择期再次剖宫产205例(ERCS组)。比较VBAC组和ERCS组的分娩及新生儿情况及TOLAC试产组中的3个亚组的试产成功率和产后出血量。结果:137例孕妇阴道试产成功,试产成功率86.7%(137/158)。TOLAC中自然临产组、宫颈成熟组和宫颈不成熟组试产成功率和产后24小时出血量比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。VBAC组和ERCS组产妇均未出现子宫破裂;VBAC组产后24小时出血量、母亲输血率、住院时间、住院费用均低于ERCS组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05);VBAC组新生儿1分钟Apgar评分与ERCS组比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:严格掌握TOLAC适应证,加强产时监测并及时处理,VBAC安全可行,对无禁忌证的孕妇可倡导阴道试产,球囊促宫颈成熟对计划性TOLAC而言可能是一种安全有效的方法。     

剖宫产后阴道分娩的影响因素

目的:探讨剖宫产后阴道分娩(VBAC)成功与否的影响因素。方法:回顾分析2013年3月1日至2015年2月28日在余姚市人民医院产科行剖宫产后阴道分娩的127例产妇的临床资料,其中阴道分娩成功102例(成功组),失败25例(失败组)。采用单因素和Logistic多因素回归分析剖宫产后阴道分娩成功与否的影响因素。结果:单因素分析发现,成功组和失败组的阴道分娩次数、孕周、头盆评分、宫颈Bishop评分、新生儿体质量比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);而年龄、体质量指数、距前次剖宫产时间、子宫下段肌层厚度比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。多因素非条件Logistic回归分析结果显示,阴道分娩次数、孕周、新生儿体质量是剖宫产后阴道分娩成功与否的重要影响因素(OR值分别为6.992、0.351和0.071)。结论:阴道分娩次数、孕周、新生儿体质量是VBAC的重要影响因素;重点关注上述因素,对VBAC者进行个体化评估,可提高VBAC的安全性和成功率。     

剖宫产后阴道试产的产时及产后评估

目的:探讨剖宫产后阴道试产(TOLAC)患者自然临产时及产后的评估及监测。方法:选择四川大学华西第二医院产科就诊的成功剖宫产后阴道分娩的患者42例(VBAC组),及同期就诊的瘢痕子宫急诊剖宫产患者50例(CS组)和阴道分娩的初产妇50例(正常分娩组)为研究对象,对3组患者的母儿相关情况进行比较。结果:3组患者的年龄、孕周、孕前体质量指数(BMI)及妊娠合并症情况比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05),VBAC组胎儿双顶径(BPD)小于其他两组(P0.05),宫颈Bishop评分高于其他两组(P0.05)。与正常分娩组比较,VBAC组产后2小时内出血量多(P0.05),但产后2~24小时内出血量和新生儿5分钟Apgar评分差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。与CS组比较,VBAC组患者24小时出血量少且住院天数短(P0.05),而新生儿5分钟Apgar评分差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:自然临产后,胎儿双顶径较小且宫颈成熟度较高的瘢痕子宫患者可以进行阴道试产,与再次剖宫产相比可以减少产后出血量及住院天数。在TOLAC过程中需要动态观察,严密监护,尤其要注意预防产时和产后2小时出血。     

剖宫产后再次妊娠自然临产分娩方式的探讨

【摘 要】 目的：探讨剖宫产后再次妊娠孕妇自然临产分娩方式的选择。方法：回顾性研究2015年1月-2016年4月在苏州母子医疗保健中心入院分娩且曾有1次剖宫产史的孕妇共230例。所有孕妇均为足月单胎,头位,自然临产,根据孕妇意愿分为阴道试产（trial of labor after cesarean,TOLAC）组（98例）和拒绝TOLAC组（132例）,TOLAC组根据最终分娩方式分为TOLAC成功组（87例）和TOLAC失败组（11例）。对孕妇的产程管理根据现有规范进行。比较3组的一般人口学特征、前次剖宫产相关因素、母婴结局和社会经济效益。结果：TOLAC成功率为88.78%（87/98）,11例因产时胎心异常或产程停滞中转剖宫产终止妊娠。3组体质量指数（BMI）比较,差异有统计学意义,且TOLAC失败组高于TOLAC成功组和拒绝TOLAC组（均P＜0.05）;其他人口学特征及前次剖宫产相关因素比较,差异均无统计学意义。TOLAC组子宫破裂率与拒绝TOLAC组比较,差异无统计学意义（2.04% vs. 1.52%, χ2=0.091,P=0.767）。3组产时出血量比较差异有统计学意义,且TOLAC成功组明显低于TOLAC失败组和拒绝TOLAC组（均P＜0.05）;3组输血率比较差异有统计学意义,TOLAC成功组输血率明显低于TOLAC失败组,差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）;TOLAC失败组与拒绝TOLAC组在产时出血量和输血率方面差异无统计学意义（P分别为0.434和0.092）;3组间新生儿入新生儿重症监护病房（NICU）率差异无统计学意义（P=0.23）。3组均未发生子宫切除和母儿死亡等严重并发症。结论：对于前次剖宫产后再次妊娠的孕妇,只要进行充分评估,在合理的监管模式下,TOLAC是一种合理安全的分娩方式,尤其当这些孕妇临产后,阴道分娩可能是比急诊剖宫产更为安全可靠的分娩方式。     

剖宫产术后再次妊娠阴道分娩产程的初步分析

目的:研究无阴道分娩史的剖宫产术后再次妊娠孕妇阴道分娩的产程特点。方法:回顾性分析2017年7月1日至2018年6月30日在深圳市妇幼保健院产科住院阴道分娩的无新生儿窒息孕妇资料。选取单胎头位、自然临产、既往无阴道分娩史的346例剖宫产术后阴道分娩(VBAC)产妇作为病例组,选取同期住院自然临产阴道分娩、单胎头位的350例正常初产妇作为对照组,比较两组产妇的产程特点。结果:病例组和对照组孕妇的年龄、分娩孕周、新生儿出生体质量、产后出血量、新生儿转科率差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组产妇第一产程、第二产程、第三产程及总产程比较,差异无统计学意义(中位数分别为7.00 vs 6.5小时、0.33 vs 0.42小时、0.17 vs 0.15小时和7.45 vs 7.28小时;P0.05)。结论:对于无阴道分娩史的剖宫产术后阴道试产(TOLAC)孕妇的产程观察与处理可与初产妇相同标准,子宫瘢痕不影响产程。     

既往分娩史对剖宫产后阴道试产结局的影响

目的:探讨既往分娩史对剖宫产后阴道试产(TOLAC)患者成功率的影响。方法:回顾性分析2013年7月至2016年3月尝试TOLAC的瘢痕子宫孕妇的资料(妊娠≥28周),共506例,其中阴道分娩成功414例(TOLAC成功组),中转剖宫产92例(TOLAC中转剖宫产组)。比较两组前次剖宫产时间、剖宫产指征、阴道分娩史、新生儿存活情况等。结果:TOLAC中转剖宫产组的孕前体质量指数(BMI)及新生儿出生体质量大于TOLAC成功组(P0.05),两组平均妊娠间隔时间比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),两组在妊娠间隔1年、1~2年、2~3年、3年的比例分别比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。两组的前次剖宫产指征分别比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。TOLAC成功组有阴道分娩史患者比例明显高于TOLAC中转剖宫产组(P0.05),新生儿未存活的比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论:既往有阴道分娩史是TOLAC成功的有利因素,而既往分娩史的其他因素对TOLAC的成功率影响较小。     

早孕期VBAC预测模型在临床中的应用

目的:验证美国母胎医学网(MFMU)最新发布的除去"种族/肤色"因素后的早孕期预测模型在我国对剖宫产术后经阴道分娩(VBAC)的预测价值.方法:收集2016年1月至2021年5月剖宫产术后阴道试产(TOLAC)产妇的早孕期相关资料,根据最终分娩方式将其分为成功组(VBAC组)和失败组(转剖宫产组),分析两组间临床资料差...     

ACOG剖宫产后阴道试产指南（2017版）解读

        剖宫产后阴道试产（trial of labor after cesarean delivery,TOLAC）为妇女提供了剖宫产后阴道分娩（vaginal birth after cesarean delivery,VBAC）的可能性,而VBAC可降低母体发病率、再次妊娠相关并发症以及总体剖宫产率。尽管TOLAC适合大多数孕妇,一些因素将增加试产失败的风险。而失败的TOLAC与VBAC、择期再次剖宫产（elective repeat cesarean delivery,ERCD）相比,母体及围产儿的发病率均增加。因此,在确定哪些人合适TOLAC时,应进行VBAC成功率及个体风险评估。美国妇产科医师学会（ACOG）2017年发布剖宫产后阴道试产指南［1］,该指南的目的在于指导如何评估TOLAC的风险、收益以及如何对剖宫产后尝试阴道分娩的患者进行管理。现解读如下。     

Vaginal birth after cesarean section: Experience from a regional hospital

ObjectiveTrial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) is an option for women with previous cesarean section. However, few women choose this option because of safety concerns. We evaluate the safety and risks associated with TOLAC and the success rate of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC).Material and methodsWe reviewed all patients with a history of previous cesarean section that underwent elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) or TOLAC in a regional teaching hospital from Nov, 2013 to May, 2018. Maternal basic clinical information, intrapartum management, postpartum complications, and neonatal outcomes were analyzed.Results199 pregnant women with a history of at least one previous cesarean section were enrolled. 156 women received ERCS and 43 women (21.6%) underwent TOLAC, with 37 (86.0%) who underwent successful VBAC. The VBAC rate was 18.6%. Higher success rate was found in women with previous vaginal birth than in women without vaginal birth (100% vs. 81.8%). One case (2.3%) in the VBAC group was complicated with uterine rupture and inevitable neonatal death during second stage of labor. The uterus was repaired without maternal complications. In another case, the newborn's condition was complicated with low APGAR score (<7) at birth due to maternal chorioamnionitis. Among indications for previous cesarean section, cephalo-pelvic disproportion (CPD) was associated with TOLAC failure and uterine rupture after VBAC.ConclusionVBAC is a feasible and safe option. Modes of delivery should be thoroughly discussed when considering TOLAC for women with history of previous cesarean section due to CPD, considering its association with TOLAC failure in second stage of labor.     

Care for Women Desiring Vaginal Birth After Cesarean

Women with a history of a prior cesarean birth may receive conflicting information regarding options in future pregnancies related to the choice of a trial of labor after a cesarean (TOLAC) or having an elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD). The National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) addressed questions related to safety and outcomes of having a VBAC compared to ERCD. Summary recommendations included increasing access to health care providers and facilities that care for women who desire a TOLAC yet factors were raised in determining what constitutes best practices. The purpose of this clinical bulletin by the American College of Nurse‐Midwives is to offer evidence‐based guidelines for midwives who are caring for women who have had a prior cesarean birth. Risk assessment, counseling, and education to support informed choices including considerations related to site of birth are provided.     

瘢痕子宫再次妊娠不同分娩方式近远期并发症比较

目的:探讨瘢痕子宫再次妊娠不同分娩方式的近远期并发症。方法:选择2002年2月至2017年12月苏州大学附属第一医院妇产科收治的瘢痕子宫孕妇2617例,其中择期再次剖宫产2246例(ERCD组),阴道试产成功334例(VBAC组),阴道试产失败转急诊剖宫产37例(TOLAC失败组)。对3组患者的妊娠结局及产后近远期并发症进行比较分析。结果:3组患者中,TOLAC失败组剖宫产患者并发症发生率最高(18.92%),其次是ERCD组患者(6.99%),而VBAC组患者并发症发生率最低(3.29%)。VBAC组出现输血、产后发热和尿潴留的比例明显低于ERCD组(分别为0 vs 1.65%、1.20%vs 4.14%、0.30%vs 2.98%,P<0.05);发生子宫破裂、输血、尿潴留、肠梗阻的比例低于TOLAC失败组(分别为0 vs 10.81%、0 vs 8.11%、0.30%vs 5.41%、0 vs 5.41%,P<0.05);TOLAC失败组发生子宫破裂、输血、肠梗阻的比例显著高于ERCD组(分别为10.81%vs 0.31%、8.11%vs 1.65%、5.41%vs 0.40%,P<0.05);VBAC组的产妇发生腰痛、肠粘连、贫血、切口部位子宫内膜异位症的比例显著低于ERCD组(分别为0 vs 5.25%、0 vs 4.69%、2.80%vs 7.93%、0 vs 3.91%,P<0.05);3组均无新生儿重度窒息发生,TOLAC失败组轻度窒息发生率(8.11%)明显高于ERCD组(1.02%)和VBAC组(1.20%),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。TOLAC失败组1分钟及5分钟Apgar评分均低于ERCD组及VBAC组(1分钟:9.43±1.65分,9.92±0.38分,9.96±0.39分;5分钟:9.64±1.34分,9.98±0.28分,9.99±0.10分),差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),且随访发现,TOLAC失败组1例轻度窒息新生儿发生脑损伤,预后不佳。结论:瘢痕子宫再次妊娠患者,阴道试产成功的母儿并发症最小,择期再次剖宫产次之,试产失败转急诊手术者母儿并发症最高。瘢痕子宫患者在有条件的情况下可以在严密监护下试产,但是需要重视对试产失败患者的处理,以改善母儿结局。     

Vaginal birth after cesarean section—The world trend and local experience in Taiwan

Objective

The trend of increasing cesarean section rates had evoked worldwide attention. Many approaches were introduced to diminish cesarean section rates. Vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) is a route of delivery with diverse agreements. In this study, we try to reveal the world trend in VBAC and our experience of a 10-year period in a medical center in northern Taiwan.

Vaginal birth after a cesarean delivery for arrest of descent*

Objective: The objective of this study is to determine vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) success rates for patients with a prior cesarean delivery (CD) for arrest of descent, as well as determine any predictors for success.

Study design: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients delivered by a single MFM practice from 2005 to 2017 with a singleton pregnancy and one prior CD for arrest of descent. We estimated the rate and associated risk factors for successful VBAC.

Results: We included 208 patients with one prior CD for arrest of descent, 100 (48.1%) of whom attempted a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) with a VBAC success rate was 84/100 (84%, 95% CI 76–90%). Among the women who attempted TOLAC, women with a prior vaginal delivery >24 weeks’ had a significantly higher VBAC success rate (91.8% versus 71.8%, p?=?.01). Maternal age, body mass index, estimated fetal weight, induction of labor, and cervical dilation were not associated with a higher VBAC success rate.

Conclusions: For women with a prior CD for arrest of descent, VBAC success rates are high. This suggests that arrest of descent is mostly dependent on factors unique to each pregnancy and not due to an inadequate pelvis or recurring conditions. Women with a prior CD for arrest of descent should not be discouraged from attempting TOLAC in a subsequent pregnancy due to concerns about the likelihood of success.     

Mode of delivery after one cesarean section.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate labor patterns and mode of delivery of aginal births after cesarean (VBAC) versus unsuccessful trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) in a South African district hospital, and the influence of the indication for the primary cesarean section (C-section) on the subsequent mode of delivery. METHODS: Retrospective audit of the partogram of 202 VBAC and 382 repeat C-section. There were 108 elective repeat cesarean deliveries (ERCD) and 274 emergency repeat C-sections after unsuccessful TOLAC. The indication of the primary C-section was known in 127: 43 (33.9%) VBAC and 84 (66.1%) repeat C-sections. RESULTS: The indication for the primary C-section in terms of recurrent/non-recurrent did not affect the subsequent mode of delivery (chi(2)=3.5; P=0.06; OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.23-1.04). The indication of the primary C-section in terms of dysfunctional/non-dysfunctional labor did not reoccur in the same parturients (chi(2)=0.01; P=0.91; OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.35-2.55). CONCLUSION: Dysfunctional labor accounted for most primary and repeat emergency C-sections, but not as a recurrent condition in the same parturients.     

Association between prior vaginal birth after cesarean and subsequent labor outcome

Objective: To estimate the effect of prior successful vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) on the rate of uterine rupture and delivery outcome in women undergoing labor after cesarean.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all women attempting labor after cesarean delivery in a university-affiliated tertiary-hospital (2007–2014) was conducted. Study group included women attempting vaginal delivery with a history of cesarean delivery and at least one prior VBAC. Control group included women attempting first vaginal delivery following cesarean delivery. Primary outcome was defined as the rate of uterine rupture. Secondary outcomes were delivery and maternal outcomes.

Results: Of 62,463 deliveries during the study period, 3256 met inclusion criteria. One thousand two hundred and eleven women had VBAC prior to the index labor and 2045 underwent their first labor after cesarean. Women in the study group had a significantly lower rate of uterine rupture 9 (0.7%) in respect to control 33 (1.6%), p?=?.036, and had a higher rate of successful vaginal birth (96 vs. 84.9%, p?p?=?.04).

Conclusions: In women attempting labor after cesarean, prior VBAC appears to be associated with lower rate of uterine rupture and higher rate of successful vaginal birth.