Prediction of Success Rates of Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Delivery According to the Previous Indication for Cesarean Delivery

  • Atia H
  • Khider A
  • Metwally N
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) has long been accepted as a safe option for women with previous cesarean delivery. Previous efforts have been exerted in trials to predict the success rates of TOLAC according to specific parameters related to previous cesarean section and before TOLAC. We aimed to investigate the different indications of previous cesarean delivery as independent predictors for successful vaginal birth. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted in Armed Forces Hospitals of the Southern Region between December 15, 2019, and July 1, 2020. The included 566 patients with previous cesarean section who were willing to undergo a trial of labor were divided into two groups according to the success of vaginal birth (VBAC). Results: The nonrecurring indications for previous cesarean delivery were higher in the successful group (fetal distress 54.7% vs 41.1%, malpresentation 26% vs 21.4%, multifetal pregnancy 3.8% vs 2.7%). Additionally, the successful VBAC group had a significantly higher percentage of previous successful VBAC (47.7% vs 21.9%) and prior vaginal deliveries (58.5% vs 44.2%) and less coincidence of medical disorders and meconium-stained liquor (18.1% vs 26.3% and 3.2% vs 8.2%, respectively) than the unsuccessful group. Conclusion: During counseling regarding trial of labor after cesarean section, indications for previous cesarean section not related to arrest of labor can predict higher success of VBAC. Moreover, previous successful vaginal delivery or VBAC improves the success rates.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Atia, H., Khider, A., & Metwally, N. M. (2023). Prediction of Success Rates of Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Delivery According to the Previous Indication for Cesarean Delivery. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 13(01), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2023.131004

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free