Secundiparas following a failed vacuum delivery—factors associated with a successful vaginal delivery: a historical prospective cohort

0Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Few studies have focused on the delivery subsequent to a failed vacuum delivery (failed-VD) in secundiparas. The objective of the current study was to examine the factors associated with a vaginal delivery following a failed-VD. Methods: An historical prospective cohort. Obstetric characteristics of secundiparas who underwent a planned caesarean delivery (CD) were compared to those who elected a trial of labour (TOLAC) at single medical-centre, throughout 2006–2019. The latter were further analysed to study for factures associated with successful vaginal birth (VBAC). Results: Among the 115 secundiparas included, 89 (77%) underwent TOLAC. Compared to women who underwent an elective CD, those who underwent TOLAC were younger by a mean of 4 years, were more likely to have conceived spontaneously, and had a more advanced gestation by a mean of 10 days. VBAC was achieved in 62 women (70%). New-borns of women with VBAC had in average a lower birth weight compared to those with failed TOLAC, (-)195 g ± 396 g versus (+)197 g ± 454 g respectively, P < 0.01. Having a higher neonatal birthweight at P2 by increments of 500 g, 400 g or 300 g was associated with a failed TOLAC; OR of 9.7 (95%CI; 2.3, 40.0), 11.5 (95%CI; 2.8, 46.7) and 4.5 (95%CI; 1.4, 13.9), respectively. Conclusions: Among secundiparas with a previous CD due to a failed-VD, the absolute difference of neonatal BW was found to be significantly associated with achieving VBAC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Reichman, O., Ehrlich, Z., Suday, R., Sela, H., Gold, G., Samueloff, A., & Grisaru-Granovsky, S. (2022). Secundiparas following a failed vacuum delivery—factors associated with a successful vaginal delivery: a historical prospective cohort. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05151-7

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