Evidence that women with a history of cesarean section can deliver twins safely

Trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean delivery in twin pregnancies after a previous cesarean delivery-A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of success rates of trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and maternal and neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancy versus elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science from data inception to May 2018 with no language or regional restrictions, to identify all studies that compared twin TOLAC and ERCD for maternal and/or neonatal outcomes. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. We assessed the pooled relative risk and mean difference using a random-effects model. The pooled event rates for successful VBAC, cesarean delivery for twin B after vaginal delivery of twin A, and uterine rupture were determined.

RESULTS

Of the 841 citations identified, 10 were eligible for analysis (2336 TOLAC cases and 5763 ERCD cases). The pooled event rates for successful VBAC and uterine rupture during TOLAC were 72.2% (95% CI 59.7%-83.2%) and 0.87% (95% CI 0.51%-1.31%), respectively. TOLAC was associated with a significantly higher risk of neonatal death (RR 3.02 [95% CI 1.07-8.54]) with no significant differences in mean gestational age at birth, NICU admission rates, or 5-minute Apgar <7. Although the risk for maternal infectious morbidity was significantly lower with TOLAC (RR 0.48 [95% CI 0.25-0.90]), risks of uterine dehiscence, blood transfusions, and hysterectomy were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Twin TOLAC is associated with a relatively high rate of successful vaginal delivery and a low risk of uterine rupture. The finding of higher neonatal mortality rates may be influenced by prematurity, but requires further investigation.

No. 155-Guidelines for Vaginal Birth After Previous Caesarean Birth

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based guidelines for the provision of a trial of labour (TOL) after Caesarean section.

OUTCOME

Fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality associated with vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) and repeat Caesarean section.

EVIDENCE

MEDLINE database was searched for articles published from January 1, 1995, to February 28, 2004, using the key words "vaginal birth after Caesarean (Cesarean) section." The quality of evidence is described using the Evaluation of Evidence criteria outlined in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam.

RECOMMENDATIONS

VALIDATION: These guidelines were approved by the Clinical Practice Obstetrics and Executive Committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

Trial of labor after cesarean delivery in twin gestations: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Trial of labor after cesarean is offered as a routine option for singleton gestations with previous cesarean delivery. However, adequate data are not available to determine whether the approach is equally valid in women with twin gestation.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess maternal morbidities associated with trial of labor after cesarean delivery in twin gestations.

STUDY DESIGN

Electronic databases were searched for cohort studies and randomized controlled trials evaluating the association between trial of labor after cesarean delivery in twin gestations and pregnancy outcomes. Maternal mortality and severe morbidities, such as uterine rupture and hysterectomy, were compared between women who had trial of labor and women who had a planned repeat cesarean delivery. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using a random-effects model. Additional analyses were performed to compare trial of labor after cesarean outcomes in singleton and twin gestations.

RESULTS

Eleven cohort studies including a total of 8209 twin gestations with previous cesarean delivery were included in the present study. Of these gestations, 2484 were intended for planned vaginal birth and 5725 were intended for planned repeat cesarean delivery. The rate of uterine rupture in twin gestations was higher in the trial of labor after cesarean group than the elective cesarean group (odds ratio, 10.09, 95% confidence interval, 4.30-23.69, I² = 68%). However, no statistically significant difference was found in the rate of uterine rupture between twin and single gestations attempting trial of labor after cesarean delivery (odds ratio, 1.34, 95% confidence interval, 0.54-3.31, I² = 0%). Women who attempted a trial of labor after cesarean delivery with twins did not have an increased risk of uterine scar dehiscence, hemorrhage, blood transfusion, or neonatal morbidity and mortality compared with elective repeat cesarean delivery. Patients with twins had similar rates of successful vaginal delivery as patients with singletons (odds ratio, 0.85, 95% confidence interval, 0.61-1.18, I² = 36%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates that, although trial of labor with twins after previous cesarean delivery is associated with higher rates of uterine rupture compared with elective cesarean delivery, pregnancy outcomes and success rates are similar to a trial of labor after previous cesarean delivery in singleton gestations. Planned vaginal birth for women with twin gestation and previous cesarean delivery may be a safe alternative to a planned repeat cesarean.

Trial of labor after cesarean section in twin pregnancies: maternal and neonatal safety

OBJECTIVE

To assess maternal and perinatal morbidity in patients undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) in twin gestations.

METHODS

A retrospective study including all twin pregnancies with a single prior cesarean section was performed. Stratified analysis using a multiple logistic regression model was performed to control for confounders. Patients who had a clear medical indication for a cesarean section (i.e. previous corporeal cesarean section, breech or transverse presentation, placenta previa, placental abruption, and herpes infection) were excluded from the analysis.

RESULTS

During the years 1988-2007, 134 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 25 patients underwent a trial of labor and the remaining 109 underwent a repeat cesarean delivery. There were no cases of uterine rupture, maternal mortality, or peripartum fever in our population. Higher rates of perinatal mortality were noted in patients undergoing a trial of labor (8% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.042, OR = 4.652, 95% CI = 1.122-19.286). However, a trial of labor was not found to be an independent risk factor for perinatal mortality after controlling for confounders such as gestational age, ethnicity, and fetal malformations (adjusted OR = 1.07, 95% CI = 0.07-15.95, p = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

A TOLAC is not associated with an increased risk for maternal morbidity, including uterine rupture. Nevertheless, in our population TOLAC was noted as a risk factor for perinatal mortality, although residual confounding cannot be excluded. Further prospective randomized studies should evaluate the safety of TOLAC in twin gestations to establish appropriate guidelines.

Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in twin gestations: a large, nationwide sample of deliveries

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to assess the maternal morbidity associated with attempted vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) in twin gestations using a large, nationwide sample of deliveries.

STUDY DESIGN

Data for this study were obtained from an administrative dataset, the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, a representative sample of discharges from non-Federal hospitals, for the years 1993 to 2002. Patients admitted nonemergently for the delivery of twin gestations who had a history of previous cesarean delivery were selected. Patients that either delivered vaginally or who had discharge codes that indicated labor before cesarean delivery were defined as the trial of labor group, while patients who had a cesarean delivery without discharge codes that indicated labor were defined as the elective cesarean group. Various complications of delivery were analyzed for each group.

RESULTS

We identified 4705 women who underwent an elective cesarean delivery and 1850 women who underwent a trial of labor. For women who had a trial of labor, 836 (45.2%) delivered vaginally. The rate of uterine rupture was higher in the trial of labor group than in the elective cesarean group (0.9% vs 0.1%, P < .001), and the rate of wound complications was lower (0.6% vs 1.3%, P < .02). The rates of other complications including hysterectomy, transfusion, major postpartum infection, thromboembolism, uterine dehiscence, and pelvic hematoma were not significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed a significantly higher rate of uterine rupture in the trial of labor group that is similar to the rates reported for trial of labor after cesarean in singleton pregnancies.

Essai de travail en cas de césarienne antérieure

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to relate the evolution of obstetrical management of delivery in women who had previously undergone cesarean delivery and to search the studies supporting the choice of the mode of delivery.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We identified relevant studies through a computer search in the Medline database.

RESULTS

After a period from 1980 to 2000 when the vaginal delivery had been increasingly recommended, a growth in the use of the planned cesarean delivery was observed. Recent studies report more evidence that uterine rupture is the result of trial of labor and that adverse perinatal outcomes are associated with uterine rupture. The risk of uterine rupture is increased with labor induction. The use of prostaglandins appears to be implicated in a significant increase of uterine rupture, and subsequently might be contraindicated in this situation. The use of oxytocin induced labor appears to increase the risk of uterine rupture. However, the level of adverse perinatal outcomes is low. The choice of the mode of delivery should take into account the likelihood of a further pregnancy, due to the increased risk of placental pathologic conditions depending on the number of repeated cesarean sections.

CONCLUSION

An optimal decision for the mode of delivery should be shared with the pregnant women and all these factors should be taken into consideration.

The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Unit cesarean registry: trial of labor with a twin gestation

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify the success rates and risks in women with a twin pregnancy who attempt a trial of labor after cesarean delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

Cases were identified in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network's Cesarean Registry with a woman with a twin pregnancy who had had at least 1 previous cesarean delivery.

RESULTS

During the study period (1999-2002), 412 women fulfilled the study criteria, and 226 women had elective repeat cesarean delivery. Of the 186 women (45.1% of total) who attempted a trial of labor, 120 women were delivered successfully (success rate, 64.5%), and 66 women (35.5%) had a failed trial of labor. Thirty of the failed trials of labor involved a vaginal delivery for twin A and cesarean delivery for twin B. Women who attempted a trial of labor with twins had no increased risk of transfusion, endometritis, intensive care unit admissions, or uterine rupture when compared with elective repeat cesarean delivery. Fetal and neonatal complications were uncommon in either group at>or=34 weeks of gestation.

CONCLUSION

A trial of labor with twins after previous cesarean delivery does not appear to increase maternal morbidity. Perinatal morbidity is uncommon at>or=34 weeks of gestation.

Intrapartum management of twins: truths and controversies

Twin gestations pose a challenge in management, and the intrapartum phase of care is not exempt. Despite increasing numbers of twin gestations, the literature does not adequately answer several basic questions regarding appropriate intrapartum management. This article provides an overview of the available literature supporting appropriate intrapartum actions in twin gestations and highlights areas that are still awaiting further study, with the eventual goal of optimizing intrapartum conditions, leading to an improved neonatal outcome.

Evidence-based vaginal birth after Caesarean section

Caesarean section rates are rising globally. Whether vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) is safe and under what circumstances is increasingly important. This chapter reviews the literature about the risks of VBAC, patient and management factors that may alter risk, and discusses ongoing research as well as suggestions for improving future research.

Guidelines for Vaginal Birth After Previous Caesarean Birth

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based guidelines for the provision of a trial of labour (TOL) after Caesarean section.

OUTCOME

Fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality associated with vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) and repeat Caesarean section.

EVIDENCE

MEDLINE database was searched for articles published from January 1, 1995, to February 28, 2004, using the key words "vaginal birth after Caesarean (Cesarean) section". The quality of evidence is described using the Evaluation of Evidence criteria outlined in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Provided there are no contraindications, a woman with 1 previous transverse low-segment Caesarean section should be offered a trial of labour (TOL) with appropriate discussion of perinatal risks and benefits. The process of informed consent with appropriate documentation should be an important part of the birth plan in a woman with a previous Caesarean section (II-2B). 2. The intention of a woman undergoing a TOL after Caesarean section should be clearly stated, and documentation of the previous uterine scar should be clearly marked on the prenatal record (II-2B). 3. For a safe labour after Caesarean section, a woman should deliver in a hospital where a timely Caesarean section is possible. The woman and her health care provider must be aware of the hospital resources and the availability of obstetric, anesthetic, pediatric, and operating-room staff (II-2A). 4. Each hospital should have a written policy in place regarding the notification and (or) consultation for the physicians responsible for a possible timely Caesarean section (III-B). 5. In the case of a TOL after Caesarean, an approximate time frame of 30 minutes should be considered adequate in the set-up of an urgent laparotomy (III-C). 6. Continuous electronic monitoring of women attempting a TOL after Caesarean section is recommended (II-2A). 7. Suspected uterine rupture requires urgent attention and expedited laparotomy to attempt to decrease maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality (II-2A). 8. Oxytocin augmentation is not contraindicated in women undergoing a TOL after Caesarean section (11-2A). 9. Medical induction of labour with oxytocin may be associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture and should be used carefully after appropriate counselling (II-2B). 10. Medical induction of labour with prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) is associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture and should not be used except in rare circumstances and after appropriate counselling (II-2B). 11. Prostaglandin E1 (misoprostol) is associated with a high risk of uterine rupture and should not be used as part of a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 12. A foley catheter may be safely used to ripen the cervix in a woman planning a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 13. The available data suggest that a trial of labour in women with more than 1 previous Caesarean section is likely to be successful but is associated with a higher risk of uterine rupture (II-2B). 14. Multiple gestation is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 15. Diabetes mellitus is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 16. Suspected fetal macrosomia is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 17. Women delivering within 18 to 24 months of a Caesarean section should be counselled about an increased risk of uterine rupture in labour (II-2B). 18. Postdatism is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 19. Every effort should be made to obtain the previous Caesarean section operative report to determine the type of uterine incision used. In situations where the scar is unknown, information concerning the circumstances of the delivery is helpful in determining the likelihood of a low transverse incision. If the likelihood of a low transverse incision is high, a TOL after Caesarean section can be offered (II-2B).

VALIDATION

These guidelines were approved by the Clinical Practice Obstetrics and Executive Committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

A comparison of the neonatal morbidity of second twins to that of a low-risk population

OBJECTIVE

To assess the neonatal morbidity of second twins.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study in a department of perinatalogy. The neonatal morbidity of second twins was compared to that of a low-risk population: singletons in the cephalic presentation delivered vaginally.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-nine second twins and 18,061 vaginally delivered singletons in the cephalic presentation were studied. Of 452 (81%) second twins delivered vaginally, 310 (69%) were extracted using obstetrical maneuvers: internal version and breech extraction, breech extraction alone, or assisted breech delivery if the breech was already engaged. Before 33 weeks of gestation, there was no significant difference between the neonatal morbidity of the vaginally delivered second twins and the vaginally delivered singletons in the cephalic presentation. After 33 weeks of gestation, only the 1-min Apgar score <7 and the rate of intubation at birth were significantly higher in the second twins. Whatever the gestational age, there was no significant difference between the neonatal morbidity of the vaginally delivered second twins and that of the second twins born by cesarean section before labor. At comparable gestational ages, there was no significant difference between the death rate of the vaginally delivered second twins and that in the reference population.

CONCLUSION

The neonatal morbidity of second twins was comparable to that of a low-risk population. Immediate management of the vaginally delivered second twins was, however, more intensive than that of vaginally delivered singletons in the cephalic presentation. It, therefore, requires appropriate equipment in a suitable obstetric-pediatric setting.

Trial of labour compared to elective Caesarean in twin gestations with a previous Caesarean delivery

OBJECTIVE

To compare maternal and neonatal outcomes in twin gestations with a vertex presenting first twin undergoing either an elective repeat Caesarean section or a trial of labour subsequent to having had a Caesarean delivery in a prior pregnancy.

METHODS

Maternal and newborn data from 1980 to 1999 in twin gestations, having 1 or more previous lower-segment Caesarean section(s) and a vertex presentation of the first twin, were analyzed from the Nova Scotia Atlee Perinatal Database. Categorical data were compared using chi-square or Fisher exact tests and continuous data by the Student t test. Logistic regression was used to control for covariates.

RESULTS

Of the 121 women eligible for the data analysis, 38 chose to have a trial of labour, and 28 delivered vaginally with no uterine ruptures, scar dehiscences, maternal deaths, or increase in neonatal morbidity or mortality reported. Two Caesareans in the trial-of-labour group were for the delivery of the second twin. Women choosing elective Caesarean section had a higher incidence of infectious morbidity (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In twin pregnancies with twin A presenting as a vertex, a cautious trial of labour may be an effective and safe alternative to elective repeat Caesarean section. Further research on a trial of labour after previous Caesarean section in twin gestations is warranted, as the studies published to date do not have sufficiently large numbers to detect adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Vaginal birth after Caesarean section: review of antenatal predictors of success

OBJECTIVE

To determine antenatal factors that may predict successful vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC).

DATA SOURCES

The MEDLINE database was searched for all English-language articles describing the impact of various factors on outcomes when VBAC is attempted. Articles reviewed included published abstracts, retrospective and prospective studies, and meta-analyses. CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they reported both a control group of pregnant women without the factor under evaluation and a study group with this factor, both undergoing a trial of labour (TOL). Other criteria included accountability for all individuals enrolled at study outset, and vaginal delivery rates in both study and control groups stated or easily calculated.

RESULTS

A nonrecurrent indication for previous Caesarean section (CS), such as breech presentation or fetal distress, is associated with a much higher successful VBAC rate than recurrent indications, such as cephalopelvic disproportion (CPD). Even with a history of CPD, two-thirds of women will have successful VBAC, though rates decrease with increasing numbers of prior CS. Prior vaginal deliveries are excellent prognostic indicators of successful VBAC, especially if the vaginal delivery follows the prior CS. A low vertical uterine incision does not seem to adversely affect VBAC success rates as compared to a low transverse incision. Maternal obesity and diabetes mellitus adversely affect VBAC outcomes. Fetal macrosomia does not appear to be a contraindication to VBAC, as success rates exceeding 50% are achieved and uterine rupture rates are not increased. Twin gestation does not preclude VBAC. Post-dates pregnancies may deliver successfully by VBAC in greater than two-thirds of cases.

CONCLUSION

There are few absolute contraindications to attempted VBAC. Attempted VBAC will be successful in the majority of attempted cases.

Twin delivery after a previous caesarean: a twelve-year experience

OBJECTIVES

To compare maternal and neonatal morbidities between trial of labour (TOL) and elective Caesarean section in women with twin pregnancies who have had a prior Caesarean.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted of women with a prior Caesarean who delivered twins at 28 weeks gestation or greater in Ste-Justine Hospital between 1988 and 2001. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between women who had a TOL (group 1) and those who had an elective Caesarean delivery (group 2).

RESULTS

Twenty-six women and 52 fetuses were included in group 1 and compared to the 71 women and 142 fetuses in group 2. Maternal age, gestational age, and birth weight were comparable in both groups. In group 1, 22 (85%) out of 26 women delivered twin A vaginally and 19 (73%) delivered both vaginally. There was no significant difference in the umbilical artery cord pH, Apgar score, ventilatory support, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit between the 2 groups. There was also no significant difference in the rate of postpartum maternal fever or decrease of serum hemoglobin between the 2 groups, but the median hospital stay was higher in the group with elective Caesarean (5.0 vs. 3.0 days, p <0.001). There were no uterine ruptures or other major complications in either group.

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences in maternal and neonatal morbidity outcomes between births by trial of labour and by elective Caesarean, in twin pregnancies after a prior Caesarean section. A trial of labour is associated with a shorter hospital stay.

Intrapartum management of multifetal pregnancies

Over the past several decades advances in assisted-reproductive technologies have resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of multifetal gestations. Concomitant with this increase there has been a gradual rise in the overall preterm birth rate, as well as other pregnancy complications related to these pregnancies. Twin, triplet, and other high-order multifetal gestation pregnancies pose a number of important issues related to antepartum and intrapartum management. Antepartum issues include ultrasound determination of zygosity, management and prevention of preterm labor, maternal/fetal surveillance for complications, and specific interventions focused on prevention of adverse maternal and/or fetal outcomes. Intrapartum issues include those related to timing of delivery, labor management, anesthesia options, and determination of an optimal delivery modality. Clearly, these issues related to the management of multifetal pregnancies are of paramount importance to optimize pregnancy outcome. As many of the issues related to antepartum care for women with multifetal gestations have been reviewed elsewhere, we have restricted the focus of this article to intrapartum management. Thus, this article reviews salient issues related to the intrapartum management of multifetal gestations, including twins, triplets, and other high-order pregnancies.

VBAC--is it worth the risk?

Enthusiasm for vaginal birth after cesarean section has waned. As a result, the cesarean birth rate is again on the rise. As a medical community and society we must decide whether the most appropriate question is "What is safest for my baby?" or "Is the risk associated with vaginal birth after cesarean acceptable?" There are risks associated with vaginal birth after cesarean, but in a hospital setting with appropriate resources these risks are low and would still seem to be acceptable.