Progress of induced labor in trial of labor after cesarean delivery

Sondgeroth, Kristina E.; Stout, Molly J.; Graseck, Anna S.; Roehl, Kimberly A.; Macones, George A.; Cahill, Alison G.

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2015.05.049

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Failure of VBAC in labor induction group has been supported by other studies. 19 As was also concluded in the study by Sondgeroth et al, 20 the VBAC success rates in our study improved as the Bishop score at admission increased, implying that modified Bishop score is an important predictor of success of VBAC.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Factors predicting Success of Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Section

Singh¹,

Verma²,

Nisha³

et al. 2016

Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The aim of this article is to study the various factors that can predict the success of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) section. Materials and methods:A retrospective cohort study of deliveries was conducted from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2014 by the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in our hospital. Patients with previous low transverse cesarean section who had undergone a trial of labor were identified. Maternal inpatient and prenatal records were reviewed in all eligible subjects. During labor, uterine activity and fetal heart rate were monitored. When indicated, oxytocin or prostaglandin E2 was used for induction of labor according to Bishop score. Emergency cesarean delivery was considered in cases with the appearance of scar tenderness, fetal distress, nonprogress of labor, and deep transverse arrest.Results: A total of 200 women were eligible for VBAC, but after written informed consent, 131 (65.5%) subjects were given trial of labor at term after one prior cesarean delivery among 3,604 deliveries while 69 (34.5%) subjects opted for elective repeat cesarean section. The overall VBAC success rate was 63.3% (76 of 120) in our study. History of spontaneous labor (p = 0.042) and history of previous vaginal delivery (p = 0.038) were found to be significantly associated with increased chance of success of VBAC, and lesser interdelivery interval was not found to be associated with decreased success rate (p = 0.096). Neither indication of previous cesarean nor birth weight of newborn (>3 kg) was found to be related to the success of VBAC. Conclusion:Vaginal birth after cesarean section is a safe practice as long as it is offered with a proper selection of candidates with factors having a high success rate. Physicians need to be aware of factors having a good outcome before counseling mothers so that failure rates decrease and successful VBAC is increased.Keywords: Trial of labor after cesarean, Vaginal birth after cesarean scoring, Vaginal delivery after cesarean vaginal birth after cesarean section.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Factors predicting Success of Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Section

Singh¹,

Verma²,

Nisha³

et al. 2016

Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Twenty of these studies were based on data from three US cohorts: a cohort in St. Louis, Missouri [29,30,42,45,61,64,66,78,79,84], the large multicenter Consortium on Safe Labor (CSL) cohort [14,34,41,52,55,58,66,83,91], and the National Collaborative Perinatal Project (CPP) cohort [92]; the CSL and CPP cohorts were compared in one study [53]. The thirteen largest studies were conducted with 50,000-150,000 participants and comprised a systematic review and meta-analysis including CSL cohort data [4], eight studies based solely on CSL data [14,34,41,52,55,66,83,91], a study in which the CSL and CPP cohorts were compared [53], two studies based on Israeli cohort data [43,47], and a study based on Swedish cohort data [59].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some studies, study group inclusion and stratification were based on specific characteristics: varieties of trial of labor after caesarean section (CS) [41,42,63,73,94], preterm induction of labor [34], cephalopelvic disproportion [39], multiple gestations [72,77], cervical cerclage [66,89], and diabetes status [29,83]. Three studies included preterm gestations down to 34 weeks [47,50,55], and three included gestations down to 23-24 weeks [77][78][79], of which one with the derived curves stratified by gestational age [79].…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Labor progression was presented in these studies as graphs of cervical dilatation against time ( [7,14,[87][88][89][90][91][92][93][94][95], as the time taken to move from one integer to the next [4,14,[26][27][28]42,43,45,[47][48][49]52,55,58,59,61,66,70,76,78,79,[82][83][84][85][86][91][92][93][94], and as cumulative stepped lines based on 95 th percentile traverse times with starting point cervical dilatation on admission [14,26,59]. Few labor curves defined normality or abnormality; most were based on the central tendencies mean or median [7,14,[87][88]…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We found that 20 of 73 studies were based on three large US cohorts [14,29,30,34,41,42,45,52,53,55,58,61,64,66,78,79,83,84,91,92], and data from the CSL (2002-2008) cohort were included in ten of the thirteen largest studies (comprising >50,000 participants), including that of Zhang et al [4,14,34,41,52,53,55,66,83,91]. The routine care provided may alter physiologic labor progression and is context specific; examples include oxytocin augmentation and ARM [126][127][128].…”

Section: Contemporary Labor Curves Are Based Mainly On Three Large Us...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Labor curves based on cervical dilatation over time and their accuracy and effectiveness: A systematic scoping review

Huurnink,

Blix,

Hals

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This systematic scoping review was conducted to 1) identify and describe labor curves that illustrate cervical dilatation over time; 2) map any evidence for, as well as outcomes used to evaluate the accuracy and effectiveness of the curves; and 3) identify areas in research that require further investigation. Methods A three-step systematic literature search was conducted for publications up to May 2023. We searched the Medline, Maternity & Infant Care, Embase, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, CINAHL, Scopus, and African Index Medicus databases for studies describing labor curves, assessing their effectiveness in improving birth outcomes, or assessing their accuracy as screening or diagnostic tools. Original research articles and systematic reviews were included. We excluded studies investigating adverse birth outcomes retrospectively, and those investigating the effect of analgesia-related interventions on labor progression. Study eligibility was assessed, and data were extracted from included studies using a piloted charting form. The findings are presented according to descriptive summaries created for the included studies. Results and implications for research Of 26,073 potentially eligible studies, 108 studies were included. Seventy-three studies described labor curves, of which ten of the thirteen largest were based mainly on the United States Consortium on Safe Labor cohort. Labor curve endpoints were 10 cm cervical dilatation in 69 studies and vaginal birth in 4 studies. Labor curve accuracy was assessed in 26 studies, of which all 15 published after 1986 were from low- and middle–income countries. Recent studies of labor curve accuracy in high-income countries are lacking. The effectiveness of labor curves was assessed in 13 studies, which failed to prove the superiority of any curve. Patient-reported health and well-being is an underrepresented outcome in evaluations of labor curves. The usefulness of labor curves is still a matter of debate, as studies have failed to prove their accuracy or effectiveness.

show abstract