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.     

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.     

Preferred and actual delivery mode after a cesarean in London, UK

OBJECTIVE: To determine the delivery mode preferred by pregnant women with 1 previous cesarean delivery and to investigate the relationship between preferred and actual mode of delivery. METHOD: We reviewed the records of 215 women who were delivered in a London hospital with a history of 1 cesarean delivery. Women who planned an elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) were compared with those who planned a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). RESULTS: Although 55.3% chose VBAC overall, only 37.8% of those who chose it were delivered by it, whereas 94.8% of those who chose ERCS were delivered by ERCS. Nonwhite women were more likely to choose VBAC than white women (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-6.1) but less likely to be deliver by it (odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.68). CONCLUSION: In this study, VBAC was the method of delivery preferred by most women. Nonwhite women were more likely to choose VBAC over ERCS but less likely to be delivered by VBAC.     

Resident education regarding technical aspects of cesarean section

OBJECTIVE: To survey obstetric/gynecologic residents around the country regarding different technical aspects of and indications for cesarean section, trends in vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) and patient choice of cesarean. STUDY DESIGN: A questionnaire was designed to address the above issues and selected demographic information. The questionnaire was sent by e-mail to all the residency programs in the country. The first 400 responses were analyzed. RESULTS: Although a midline vertical incision is considered faster for entry into the abdomen, 77% of residents use a Pfannenstiel incision for urgent/emergency cesarean sections. Fifty-five percent of respondents use single-layer closure of the uterine incision, 37% use double-layer closure, while 11% use single-layer closure only in patients undergoing concomitant sterilization. When questioned regarding a trial of labor, one-third of respondents stated that they would not induce labor in patients with a prior cesarean if the patients did not go into labor spontaneously but offer repeat cesarean for fear of a uterine rupture. Further, 42% said that they would never offer VBAC for an undocumented scar, 12% would and 45% would depending on the history. Regarding the issue of cesarean section by patient request, 94% would not offer an elective cesarean section for uncomplicated primigravidas, while 6% would. However, if a well-informed patient desired an elective cesarean delivery, the majority of residents would respect the patient's request. CONCLUSION: There is wide variation in the way residents are trained regarding different technical aspects of and indications for cesarean section, choice of repeat cesarean versus VBAC and patient choice of cesarean. Recent trends in the literature are not always reflected in reported practice patterns.     

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。     

Prevention of urinary and anal incontinence: role of elective cesarean delivery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Currently, prophylactic elective cesarean to prevent incontinence is being promoted without robust evidence supporting it, this has created confusion among health personnel [corrected]. Past research centered on defining the damaging effect of vaginal birth on continence whilst the limited research on elective cesarean considered it protective. Cesarean delivery has economic, obstetric, gynecological and psychosocial consequences, but incontinence is not uncommon with a persistent morbidity. There is confusion among health personnel about advocating elective cesarean delivery to prevent incontinence. Reviewing current research would facilitate obstetric thinking. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiplanar endosonography and three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging scanning are reportedly better in delineating structural alterations in the continence mechanism following vaginal birth and could be applied to postcesarean incontinence. Incontinence can follow vaginal or elective cesarean delivery and the severity following either mode is comparable. Urinary incontinence can resolve, persist or start de novo and the primiparous prevalence is similar following cesarean or vaginal birth. Transient anal incontinence can manifest during pregnancy. Paradoxically, pelvic floor strengthening exercises are beneficial for pregnancy-related incontinence, yet urinary incontinence occurs in nulliparas notwithstanding a strong pelvic floor. SUMMARY: Improved imaging techniques should promote a better understanding of postcesarean incontinence. Since severe incontinence can occur after elective cesarean, its reportedly preventative role deserves more scrutiny. When incontinence occurs without labor, it is transient or shows exercise-related improvement; the role of elective cesarean delivery seems tenuous and needs careful evaluation. Current evidence does not support the routine use of elective cesarean to prevent incontinence so the delivery mode should continue to be dictated by obstetric considerations.     

Vaginal birth after cesarean section in grand multiparous women

Objective. To determine the rate, delivery outcome and safety of attempted vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) in grand multiparous women (para 6 or more). Methods. This is a retrospective case-control study, performed at King Abdulaziz university hospital, the charts of 405 grand multiparous women with previous caesarean section were reviewed to determine rate and delivery outcome of attempted VBAC. The outcome of 217 VBAC in grand multiparous women was compared to the outcome of 217 VBAC in multiparous women (para 2–5) during the same period. Results. The rate of VBAC in grand multiparous women was 53.6%. One hundred-seventy five (80.7%) grand multiparous women were delivered vaginally compared to 170 (78.3%) in multiparous women, this was not statistically significant difference. Sixteen (7.4%) grand multiparous women need labor augmentation with oxytocin, while 34 (16%) in multiparous women, this was statistically significant difference (P value 0.005). The labor duration was 6.4±3.5 h in grand multiparous women compared to 9.0±4.3 h in multiparous women, and was also statistically significant difference (P value 0.001). The fetal weight, Apgar scores, postpartum hemorrhage, fever and number of hospital days in the two groups, were not statistically significant differences. In the control multiparous women there was one uterine rupture, two uterine dehiscence, and one stillbirth due to placental abruption. Conclusion. VBAC in grand multiparous women is common practice, safe and efficacious. High parity in association with vaginal deliveries is good prognostic factor and also can predict successful VBAC outcome. However, further studies are needed to confirm our findings.     

阴道分娩和剖宫产对女性盆底功能的影响

盆底功能障碍性疾病(PFD)是临床症状表现为盆腔器官脱垂、尿失禁和粪失禁等症状的疾病,妊娠和分娩是产后PFD发生的主要因素.既往研究表明,产后PFD的发生与阴道分娩相关,而剖宫产可预防产后PFD的发生,但是阴道分娩和剖宫产对PFD发生的风险尚存争议.文章分析不同分娩方式对产后盆腔器官脱垂、尿失禁和粪失禁的影响,探讨分娩...     

Maternal morbidity following a trial of labor after cesarean section vs elective repeat cesarean delivery: a systematic review with metaanalysis

This study reviewed maternal morbidity following trial of labor (TOL) after cesarean section, compared with elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCS). Articles were pooled to compare women planning vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) with those undergoing ERCS with regard to maternal morbidity (MM), uterine rupture/dehiscence (UR/D), blood transfusion (BT), and hysterectomy. The former group was subdivided into successful VBAC (S-VBAC) and failed TOL (F-TOL). VBAC was successful in 17,905 of 24,349 patients (73%). MM, BT, and hysterectomy were similar in women planning VBAC or ERCS, whereas UR/D was different (1.3%; 0,4%). MM, UR/D, BT and hysterectomy were more common after F-TOL (17%, 4.4%, 3%; 0.5%) than after S-VBAC (3.1%, 0.2%, 1.1%; 0.1%) or ERCS (4.3%, 0.4%, 1%; 0.3%). Outcomes were more favorable in S-VBAC than ERCS. These findings show that a higher risk of UR/D in women planning VBAC than ERCS is counterbalanced by reduction of MM, UR/D. and hysterectomy when VBAC is successful.     

The impact of maternal obesity and weight gain on vaginal birth after cesarean section success

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to determine the impact of maternal obesity on success of a trial of labor (vaginal birth after cesarean section [VBAC]) after a single low transverse cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: Individual charts of women with low transverse cesarean delivery in their first viable pregnancy who underwent a VBAC in their second viable pregnancy at our urban tertiary care institution were reviewed. Maternal body mass index (BMI) was classified as underweight (<19.8 kg/m2), normal (19.8-24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), or obese (> or =30 kg/m2). Clinical characteristics and labor outcomes were assessed. Factors potentially affecting VBAC success were analyzed by univariate analysis. Logistic regressions were performed to determine the impact of maternal pregravid BMI on VBAC success after controlling for confounding factors. RESULTS: Of 510 women attempting a trial of labor, 337 (66%) were successful and 173 (34%) failed VBAC. Decreased VBAC success was seen in obese (54.6%) but not overweight (65.5%) women compared with women of normal BMI (70.5%), P = .003 and .36, respectively. Underweight women had more VBAC success than women of normal BMI (84.7% vs 70.5%, P = .04). Controlling for other factors, the association between increasing pregravid BMI and BMI > or =30 kg/m 2 with decreased VBAC success persisted, P = .03 and .006, respectively. Normal BMI women who became overweight before the second pregnancy had decreased VBAC success compared with those whose BMI remained normal (56.6% vs 74.2%, P = .006). However, overweight women who decreased their BMI to normal before the second pregnancy did not significantly improve VBAC success (64.0% vs 58.4%, P = .67). CONCLUSION: Increasing pregravid BMI and weight gain between pregnancies reduce VBAC success after a single low transverse cesarean delivery.     

Obstetric outcomes in women with two prior cesarean deliveries: is vaginal birth after cesarean delivery a viable option?

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to compare clinical outcomes in women with 1 versus 2 prior cesarean deliveries who attempt vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC) and also to compare clinical outcomes of women with 2 prior cesarean deliveries who attempt VBAC or opt for a repeat cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study, in which the medical records of more than 25,000 women with a prior cesarean delivery from 16 community and tertiary care hospitals were reviewed by trained nurse abstractors. Information on demographics, obstetric history, medical and social history, and the outcomes of the index pregnancy was obtained. Comparisons of obstetric outcomes were made between women with 1 versus 2 prior cesarean deliveries, and also between women with 2 prior cesarean deliveries who opt for VBAC attempt versus elective repeat cesarean delivery. Both bivariate and multivariate techniques were used for these comparisons. RESULTS: The records of 20,175 women with one previous cesarean section and 3,970 with 2 prior cesarean sections were reviewed. The rate of VBAC success was similar in women with a single prior cesarean delivery (75.5%) compared with those with 2 prior cesarean deliveries (74.6%), though the odds of major morbidity were higher in those with 2 prior cesarean deliveries (adjusted odd ratio[OR] = 1.61 95% CI 1.11-2.33). Among women with 2 prior cesarean deliveries, those who opt for a VBAC attempt had higher odds of major complications compared with those who opt for elective repeat cesarean delivery (adjusted OR = 2.26, 95% CI 1.17-4.37). CONCLUSION: The likelihood of major complications is higher with a VBAC attempt in women with 2 prior cesarean deliveries compared with those with a single prior cesarean delivery. In women with 2 prior cesarean deliveries, while major complications are increased in those who attempt VBAC relative to elective repeat cesarean delivery, the absolute risk of major complications remains low.     

Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to assess the safety of trial of labor after previous cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of 308,755 Canadian women with previous cesarean delivery between 1988 and 2000. Occurrences of in-hospital maternal death, uterine rupture, and other severe maternal morbidity were compared between women with a trial of labor and those with an elective cesarean section. RESULTS: Rates of uterine rupture (0.65%), transfusion (0.19%), and hysterectomy (0.10%) were significantly higher in the trial-of-labor group. Maternal in-hospital death rate, however, was lower in the trial-of-labor group (1.6 per 100,000) than in the elective cesarean section group (5.6 per 100,000). The association between trial of labor and uterine rupture was stronger in low volume (<500) than in high volume (> or =500 births per year) obstetric units. CONCLUSION: Trial of labor is associated with increased risk of uterine rupture, but elective cesarean section may increase the risk of maternal death.     

Cervical dilatation at the time of cesarean section may affect the success of a subsequent vaginal delivery

Objective.?To evaluate the effect of labor progress prior to cesarean delivery on the outcome of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC).

Methods. The medical records of women attempting VBAC between January 2000 and February 2008 were reviewed. All women had only one previous cesarean and underwent spontaneous labor.

Results.?Among 1148 enrolled women, 956 (83.3%) achieved a successful VBAC. Birth weight, previous indication for cesarean delivery and oxytocin augmentation were significantly associated with VBAC outcome. By multivariate analysis, a cervical dilatation ≥8 cm at previous cesarean was independently predictive of successful VBAC in women with a previous cesarean for non-recurrent indications (p = 0.046), yielding a VBAC success rate of 93.1%, whereas the extent of cervical dilatation at the previous cesarean did not affect the outcome of subsequent delivery in women with a previous cesarean for recurrent indications.

Conclusions.?Women with cesarean for non-recurrent indications who achieved a cervical dilatation ≥8 cm may be the best candidates for VBAC, with the greatest likelihood of a successful VBAC. Labor progress at previous cesarean can serve as a valuable indicator for VBAC outcome in women with a previous cesarean for non-recurrent indications, and therefore should be discussed as part of preconception counseling.     

Mechanical induction of labor and ecbolic-less vaginal birth after cesarean section: A cohort study

Objective

During delivery counseling, some women with previous uncomplicated cesarean section (CS) wish mechanical induction of labor (IOL) but they are not accepting the added risk of using ecbolics to induce and/or augment labor. The objective of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of the isolated use of transcervical Foley's catheter balloon as a mean of mechanical cervical ripening (CR)/IOL and successful ecbolic-less vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC).

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。     

Variables associated with successful vaginal birth after one cesarean section: a proposed vaginal birth after cesarean section score

The objective of this study was to define the variables associated with vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) and to develop a scoring system for the prediction of successful VBAC. We searched our computerized database for parturients with a history of one low-transverse cesarean section (CS) who were delivered during the year 2000. Variables were categorized according to the time period in which they were obtained: (1) first prenatal visit, (2) at the onset of labor, and (3) during labor. Univariate and multiple stepwise logistic regression models were fitted to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Of the 475 parturients with a history of one previous CS, 136 underwent elective CS and 339 underwent a trial of VBAC, of whom 82% were successful. Of the variables that can be obtained at the onset of labor, five were significantly associated with successful VBAC: abnormal presentation as the indication for the primary CS (OR, 7.4; 95% CI 2.8 to 19.2), a previous VBAC (OR, 7.2; 95% CI, 2.1 to 24.8), cervical dilation (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.9), gestational age < or = 41 weeks (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.1), and lower gestational age at the primary CS (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.4). In the proposed VBAC score, each of the four most significant variables was assigned a score ranging between 0 and 3 based on the probability for VBAC. A score < or = 2 was associated with a success rate of 42%, a score between 3 and 6 was associated with a rate of 81%, and a score between 7 and 10 was associated with a 98% successful VBAC rate (p < 0001). The proposed VBAC score may help obstetricians when counseling their patients regarding the individual likelihood of a successful VBAC.     

Danish obstetricians' personal preference and general attitude to elective cesarean section on maternal request: a nation-wide postal survey

OBJECTIVE: To assess Danish obstetricians' and gynecologists' personal preference and general attitude towards elective cesarean section on maternal request in uncomplicated single cephalic pregnancies at term. DESIGN: Nation-wide anonymous postal questionnaire. POPULATION: Four hundred and fifty-five obstetricians and gynecologists identified in the records of the Danish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology from January 2000. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Personal preference on the mode of delivery and general attitude towards elective cesarean section on maternal request in an uncomplicated single cephalic pregnancies at term. RESULTS: Of Danish specialists in obstetrics and gynecology, 1.1% would prefer an elective cesarean section in an uncomplicated pregnancy at 37 weeks of gestation with fetal weight estimation of 3.0 kg. This rose to 22.5% when the fetal weight estimation was 4.5 kg at 37 weeks. The main reasons given for preferring abdominal deliveries was the risk to the fetus, risks of perineal injury, and urinary and anal incontinence. Of Danish specialists in obstetrics and gynecology, 37.6% agreed with a woman's right to have an elective cesarean section on maternal request without any medical indication. Obstetricians and gynecologists who had experienced a noninstrumental vaginal delivery themselves or practiced as a private gynecologist only, were less likely to agree with the woman's right to elective cesarean section on maternal request. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of Danish obstetricians and gynecologists would personally prefer vaginal delivery in uncomplicated pregnancies, but nearly 40% agree with the woman's right to request a cesarean section.     

超声测量宫颈长度与剖宫产术后阴道分娩成功的相关性

目的:分析剖宫产术后阴道分娩(VBAC)的影响因素。方法:选取剖宫产术后阴道试产(TOLAC)的114例孕妇。超声测定其宫颈长度,根据最终是否成功VBAC分为成功组和失败组,采用单因素和多因素Logistic回归分析影响VBAC的因素,观察宫颈长度是否是影响VBAC的独立因素。结果:TOLAC成功率为46.49%。单因素分析显示,成功组和失败者的年龄、出血量、孕产次、距上次剖宫产时间、上次是否进入产程、分娩孕周、阴道分娩史等比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P0.05);成功组的自然临产率和分娩镇痛率均较失败组高(均P0.05),新生儿体重低于失败组(P0.05)。Logistics多因素分析显示,自然临产和宫颈长度为VBAC的独立影响因素,自然临产(B=3.014,P0.001,OR=20.372)为TOLAC成功的保护因素,宫颈长度为TOLAC成功的危险因素(B=-0.091,P0.05,OR=0.913)。成功组的平均宫颈长度(19.86±11.05)mm,明显短于失败组[(28.61±7.75)mm](P0.01)。宫颈长度每减少1mm对TOLAC成功的优势比为1.095。结论:自然临产是TOLAC成功的有利因素,超声测量的宫颈长度为TOLAC成功率的独立影响因素。     

Vaginal delivery following previous cesarean section in 1983

In 1983 the question whether or not to perform vaginal delivery following previous cesarean section is again presented to the obstetrical community. Data are presented on 778 patients managed during the decade January 1, 1973 to December 31, 1982. Four hundred seventy-six had scheduled repeat cesarean section on an elective basis. One hundred sixty-five experienced normal vaginal delivery. One hundred thirty-seven failed the attempt and were delivered by cesarean section. The group that delivered vaginally and scheduled elective cesarean section did well. However, in the failed attempt the problems were awesome regardless of indication or number of previous cesarean sections.     

Recent trends and patterns in cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries in the United States

Cesarean delivery is the most common major surgical procedure for women in the United States, with 1.4 million surgeries annually. In 2008, nearly one-third (32.3%) of US births were by cesarean delivery. Cesarean delivery rates have increased rapidly in the United States in recent years because of an increasing primary cesarean delivery rate and a declining vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rate. In 2007, the VBAC rate was 8.3% in a 22-state reporting area. The US VBAC rate was lowest among 14 industrialized countries; 3 countries had VBAC rates greater than 50%.