Risk factors of unsuccessful vaginal twin delivery

Delivery Methods in Twin Gestations: Evaluating Outcomes, Risk Factors, and the Paradigm Shift Towards Elective Cesarean Deliveries

During the past decade, there has been a consistent rise in the number of twin births and the number of overall cesarean sections (CS) worldwide. This is owed to a variety of social, economic, educational, and scientific factors. More women are opting to advance their professional careers and gain financial stability before having children. Although this approach is understandable, a new set of challenges are faced as a result, the most important of which has been infertility due to advanced maternal age and the subsequent use of assisted fertility treatments, which have been noted to cause multiple gestations. Twin gestations are considered high-risk pregnancies and are associated with an amplitude of potential complications. Arguably, the biggest decision an obstetrician must make when dealing with this population is choosing the most appropriate mode of delivery. Given the lack of clear guidance pertaining to twin deliveries, CSs may often be perceived as safer and are often preferred over vaginal deliveries (VD). In this narrative review, we aimed to compare the outcomes of different delivery methods (CS versus VD) to investigate whether CS is truly superior to VD. Data were collected from the past two decades and analyzed based on the neonatal and maternal outcomes for each delivery mode. Our results indicate that planned VD is just as safe as CS, if not superior, in most uncomplicated twin pregnancies. Thus, it is best to advise and encourage healthy expecting twin carriers to undergo VD and explore any hesitations or fears they might have. Furthermore, a detailed guideline regarding twin delivery is essential to establish and better navigate twin deliveries, lower the rate of unnecessary CSs, and reduce overall twin gestation morbidity and mortality.

Mode of delivery of Finnish dichorionic and monochorionic-diamniotic twins: A retrospective observational study including a risk score for intrapartum cesarean birth

Background and Aims

Trial of labor is considered safe also among twins, yet nearly 50% are born via cesarean section in Finland. While planned cesarean births have declined among twins, intrapartum cesarean deliveries have risen, postulating evaluation of criteria for trial of labor. The objective of this study was to create an outline of the mode of delivery of dichorionic and monochorionic-diamniotic Finnish twins. By evaluating risk factors for intrapartum cesarean delivery (CD), we aimed at creating a risk score for intrapartum cesarean birth for twins.

Methods

A retrospective observational study based on a cohort of dichorionic and monochorionic-diamniotic twin pregnancies considered as candidates for trial of labor in 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018 (n = 720) was performed. Differences between parturients with vaginal delivery and intrapartum CD to identify potential risk factors for intrapartum CD were assessed. Logistic regression analysis (n = 707) was used to further define risk score points for recognized risk factors.

Results

A total of 23.8% (171/720, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 20.7-26.9) of parturients experienced intrapartum CD. Induction of labor, primiparity, fear of childbirth, artificial reproductive technology, higher maternal age, and other than cephalic/cephalic presentation independently associated with intrapartum CD. The achieved total risk score ranged from 0 to 13 points with significantly higher points among the CD group (6.61 vs. 4.42, p < 0.001). Using ≥8 points as a cut-off, 51.4% (56/109) were delivered by intrapartum CD (sensitivity = 33.73%, specificity = 90.20%, positive predictive value = 51.38%, negative predictive value = 81.61%). The total risk score had a fair predictive capability for intrapartum CD (area under the curve = 0.729, 95% CI = 0.685-0.773).

Conclusion

Fair-level risk stratification could be achieved with higher maternal age, primiparity, induction of labor, artificial reproductive technology, fear of childbirth, and other than cephalic/cephalic presentation increasing the risk. Parturients with low-risk score (0-7 points) appear to be the best candidates for trial of labor with acceptable CD rates in this group (18.4%).

Twin birth: The maternal experience

OBJECTIVE

Twin birth is a special setting for women giving birth, and the experience of childbirth can be different from singleton birth. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the childbirth experiences of twin mothers and singleton mothers. We also aimed to identify the risk factors of a negative childbirth experience in the whole study population.

METHODS

All live diamniotic twin deliveries in the study hospital of at least 35⁺⁰ weeks of gestation with a plan of vaginal birth were included in this matched groups study from August 2015 to August 2019. For every twin birth, two singleton birth controls were selected and matched with parity, the actual mode of birth, and gestational weeks at birth. Six weeks after birth, a Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) was sent to mothers, and 72 twin mothers and 126 singleton mothers returned the questionnaire.

RESULTS

The twin mothers' overall childbirth experience was positive. They reported a significantly lower opportunity to choose the birthing position (p < 0.001). Otherwise, there were no differences in the CEQ mean total scores between the study groups. Intrapartum cesarean section raised the risk of a negative childbirth experience and there was a high level of satisfaction with midwifery care among the whole study population.

CONCLUSION

The overall maternal experience in planned vaginal twin birth was positive. Twin mothers felt less often able to choose their birthing position, otherwise the childbirth experience did not differ from that of singleton mothers.

Guideline No. 428: Management of Dichorionic Twin Pregnancies

OBJECTIVE

To review evidence-based recommendations for the management of dichorionic twin pregnancies.

TARGET POPULATION

Pregnant women with a dichorionic twin pregnancy.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Implementation of the recommendations in this guideline may improve the management of twin pregnancies and reduce neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed and the Cochrane Library using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., twin, preterm birth). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date limits, but results were limited to English- or French-language materials.

VALIDATION METHODS

The content and recommendations were drafted and agreed upon by the principal authors. The Board of the SOGC approved the final draft for publication. The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and weak recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

Obstetricians, family physicians, nurses, midwives, maternal-fetal medicine specialists, radiologists, and other health care providers who care for women with twin pregnancies.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.