Parity, placental location, amount of amniotic fluid, and type of breech presentation were associated with the success rate of ECV.

Objective To determine if external cephalic version (ECV) can be performed with safety and efficacy in women with previous caesarean section.Design Prospective comparative cohort study. Setting Cruces University Hospital (Spain).Population Single pregnancy with breech presentation at term. Main outcome measures Success rate, complications of the ECV and caesarean section rate.Results The success rate of ECV in women after previous caesarean section was 67.1% versus 66.1% in multiparous women (P = 0.87). The logistic regression analysis confirmed this result (odds ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.52-1.68; P = 0.82) adjusted by the variables associated with success of ECV. There were no complications in the previous caesarean section cohort. The vaginal delivery rate in the previous caesarean section cohort was 52.8% versus 74.9% in the multiparous cohort (P < 0.01). There were no cases of uterine rupture.Conclusion Based on our data, we conclude that complications are uncommon with ECV in women with previous caesarean section, with a success rate comparable to that of multiparous women. Uterine scar should not be considered a contraindication and ECV should be offered to women with previous caesarean section with breech presentation at term.

Management of breech presentation with a protocol that includes ECV, careful selection criteria and active management of vaginal delivery achieve a great decrease in the rate of CS for breech presentation.

OBJECTIVE. To determine whether fetal weight estimated by ultrasound on the day the external cephalic version (ECV) is related to the procedure's success rate. DESIGN. Retrospective cohort study. Setting. University hospital. POPULATION OR SAMPLE. Two hundred women with a singleton pregnancy undergoing an ECV attempt between March 2002 and March 2006. METHOD. Projected birthweight at delivery was calculated. Logistic regression analysis, by grams and by weight intervals, and multiple correspondence analysis were performed to determine whether or not the weight was related to the procedure's success. Specific statistical analysis was undertaken to minimize measurement bias in fetal weight estimation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE. Success of ECV in relation to estimated fetal weight. RESULTS. Measurement bias was ruled out because no statistically significant differences were identified with the Student's t-test (p>0.05), Bland-Altman's agreement analysis, and the interclass correlation coefficient analysis (ICC = 0.829; CI95% 0.772-0.871; p<0.01). By logistic regression analysis, a variable relation between fetal weight estimated by ultrasound and ECV success was detected, while multiple correspondence analysis suggested that variations in fetal weight are weakly related to the procedure's success or failure. No relation was identified between ECV and birthweight (p = 0.38) when the delivery took place in the same week as the version. CONCLUSIONS. Estimated fetal weight before ECV seems not to be related to the outcome of ECV.

A score composed of four easily measurable variables enabled us to predict the outcome of ECV at term.