Article

Outcomes of Induction of Labor After One Prior Cesarean

Columbia University, New York, New York, United States
Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.37). 02/2007; 109(2 Pt 1):262-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000254169.49346.e9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare pregnancy outcomes in women with one prior low-transverse cesarean delivery after induction of labor with pregnancy outcomes after spontaneous labor.
This study is an analysis of women with one prior low-transverse cesarean and a singleton gestation who underwent a trial of labor and who were enrolled in a 4-year prospective observational study. Pregnancy outcomes were evaluated according to whether a woman underwent spontaneous labor or labor induction.
Among the 11,778 women studied, vaginal delivery was less likely after induction of labor both in women without and with a prior vaginal delivery (51% versus 65%, P<.001; and 83% versus 88%, P<.001). An increased risk of uterine rupture after labor induction was found only in women with no prior vaginal delivery (1.5% versus 0.8%, P=.02; and 0.6% versus 0.4%, P=.42). Blood transfusion, venous thromboembolism, and hysterectomy were also more common with induction among women without a prior vaginal delivery. No measure of perinatal morbidity was associated with labor induction. An unfavorable cervix at labor induction was not associated with any adverse outcomes except an increased risk of cesarean delivery.
Induction of labor in the study population is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery in all women with an unfavorable cervix, a statistically significant, albeit clinically small, increase in maternal morbidity in women with no prior vaginal delivery, and no appreciable increase in perinatal morbidity.
II.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Ronald Wapner, Jul 03, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
153 Views
  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor after one previous cesarean (TOLAC) when incorporating long-term events and outcomes. A Markov model comparing TOLAC with elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD) was developed for a hypothetical cohort with no contraindication to a TOLAC. Women were selected from a prospective study to derive probability estimates for potential events through three subsequent pregnancies. Probabilities for cerebral palsy and stress urinary incontinence, cost data, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were obtained from the literature. The primary outcome was cost-effectiveness measured as the marginal cost per QALY gained, with a $50,000 threshold per QALY used to define cost-effectiveness. The TOLAC strategy dominated the ERCD strategy at baseline, with $164.2 million saved and 500 QALYs gained per 100,000 women. The model was sensitive to six variables: the probability of uterine rupture and successful TOLAC among women with no prior vaginal delivery, the frequency of stress urinary incontinence, and the costs of failed TOLAC, successful TOLAC, and ERCD. When the probability of TOLAC success was at the base value, 67.2%, TOLAC was preferred if the probability of uterine rupture was 3.1% or less. When the probability of uterine rupture was at the base value, 0.8%, the TOLAC strategy was preferred as long as the probability of success was 47.2% or more. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the base-case analysis. Under baseline circumstances, TOLAC is less expensive and more effective than an ERCD when considering long-term consequences when the likelihood of success is 47.2% or more.
    Value in Health 09/2013; 16(6):953-64. DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2013.06.014 · 2.89 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The goal of this manuscript is to review the contemporary evidence on issues pertinent to improving the safety profile of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) attempts. Patients attempting VBAC have success rates of 60%-80%, and no reliable method of predicting VBAC failure for individual patients exists. The rate of uterine rupture in all patients ranges from 0.7% to 0.98%, but the rate of uterine rupture decreases in patients with a prior vaginal delivery. In fact, in patients with a prior vaginal delivery, VBAC appears to be safer from the maternal standpoint than repeat cesarean. Inevitably, the obstetrician today will encounter the situation of deciding whether or not to induce a patient with a uterine scar, and particular attention is paid to the success and risks of inducing labor in this patient population. Induction of labor is associated with a slightly lower successful vaginal delivery rate, although the rate remains above 50% in virtually all patient populations. The rate of uterine rupture increases slightly, but still remains around 2%-3%. Although misoprostol use is discouraged due to its association with increased risks of uterine rupture, transcervical catheters, oxytocin, and amniotomy may be used to induce labor in women attempting VBAC.
    Obstetrical & gynecological survey 08/2008; 63(8):538-45. DOI:10.1097/OGX.0b013e31817f1505 · 2.36 Impact Factor