ELECTIVE REPEAT CESAREAN DELIVERY VERSUS TRIAL OF LABOR - A PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER STUDY

Citation
Bl. Flamm et al., ELECTIVE REPEAT CESAREAN DELIVERY VERSUS TRIAL OF LABOR - A PROSPECTIVE MULTICENTER STUDY, Obstetrics and gynecology, 83(6), 1994, pp. 927-932
Citations number
22
Categorie Soggetti
Obsetric & Gynecology
Journal title
ISSN journal
00297844
Volume
83
Issue
6
Year of publication
1994
Pages
927 - 932
Database
ISI
SICI code
0029-7844(1994)83:6<927:ERCDVT>2.0.ZU;2-U
Abstract
Objective: To report a prospective multicenter comparison of outcomes of patients who attempted trial of labor and those who underwent elect ive repeat cesarean. Methods: During the study interval, all pregnant women with previous cesarean delivery cared for at Kaiser Permanente H ospitals in Southern California were studied regardless of whether tri al of labor or elective repeat cesarean was planned. Results: Of 7229 study patients, 5022 (70%) had a trial of labor and 2207 had elective repeat cesarean operations. Seventy-five percent (3746) of those optin g for trial of labor went on to deliver vaginally. The rate of uterine rupture was less than 1% and there were no maternal deaths related to uterine rupture. The hospital length of stay, incidence of postpartum transfusion, and incidence of postpartum fever were all significantly higher in the elective repeat cesarean group than in the trial of lab or group. Conclusions: Labor after previous cesarean delivery has a 75 % success rate, with a risk of uterine rupture of less than 1%. Neithe r repeat cesarean delivery nor trial of labor is risk-free. With caref ul supervision, trial of labor eliminates the need for a large proport ion of repeat cesarean operations.