Mode of delivery and problems in subsequent births: A register-based study from Finland

La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.7). 08/2005; 193(1):169-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.11.007
Source: PubMed


The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of delivery on problems in subsequent births.
This was a cohort study that used register data for 73,104 mothers who had their first birth from 1987 to 1989 and subsequent births from 1987 to1998. Three analyses were performed: (1) examination of second births by mode of delivery in the first birth, with adjustment for confounders, (2) same parameter, with exclusion of women with persistent problems, and (3) examination of third births for women with a first birth vaginal delivery.
More complications and poorer infant outcome were found at later births when the first or second birth was by cesarean delivery than after a first spontaneous vaginal delivery, even when women with persistent problems were excluded. Women with instrument first births had a similar rate of complications in the second birth to women with spontaneous vaginal births, but some infant outcomes were poorer.
Problems that are subsequent to cesarean delivery are unlikely to be explained entirely by indications for cesarean delivery.

10 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient-choice cesarean delivery is in- creasing in the United States. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists supports this option, citing ethical premises of autonomy and informed consent, despite a lack of evidence for its safety. This increase in patient-choice cesarean delivery occurs during a time when women with a breech-presenting fetus or a previous cesarean section have fewer choices as to vaginal birth. Patient-choice cesarean delivery may become widely dissemi- nated before the potential risks to women and their children have been well analyzed. The growing pressure for cesarean delivery in the absence of a medical indication may ultimately result in a decrease of women's childbirth op- tions. Advocacy of patient-choice requires preserving vaginal birth options as well as cesarean delivery.
  • Source

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery is associated with a greater perinatal risk than is elective repeated cesarean delivery without labor, although absolute risks are low. Information and counselling aim to estimate specific risks and to balance these risks according to individual factors. Therefore, the physician has to answer two questions: (i) which would be the probability of successful vaginal delivery? (ii) which would be the risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor? The risk factors for failure of trial of labor are: increased maternal age, obesity, and fetal macrosomia. The risk factors for uterine rupture are: increased maternal age, postpartum fever after the previous cesarean delivery, short interdelivery interval, history of at least two previous cesarean deliveries, and a history of classical incision. Conversely, other factors are of good prognosis: a prior vaginal delivery and, particularly, a prior VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Caesarean) are associated with a higher rate of successful trial of labor compared with patients with no prior vaginal delivery; ultrasonographic measurement of the lower uterine segment thickness>3.5 mm has an excellent negative predictive value for the risk of uterine defect. Finally, the wish for additional pregnancies following a cesarean section must be considered as an argument in favour of a trial of labor after accounting for the increasing risks correlated with repeated elective cesarean deliveries.
    Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité 12/2005; 33(12):1003-1008. DOI:10.1016/j.gyobfe.2005.10.001 · 0.52 Impact Factor
Show more