A Trial of Labor after Cesarean Section with a Macrosomic Neonate. Is It Safe?

This study aimed to determine whether a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) with a macrosomic neonate is associated with adverse outcomes. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a population motivated for TOLAC. Women attempting TOLAC with a neonatal birth weight >4,000 g were compared with women attempting TOLAC with neonatal birth weights between 3,500 and 4,000 g. The primary outcome was TOLAC success. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, uterine rupture, postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), shoulder dystocia, obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI), Apgar's score <7 at 5 minutes, and umbilical artery pH <7.1. Data were analyzed using Fisher's exact test and Chi-square test. Overall, 375 women who underwent TOLAC with a neonate weighing >4,000 g comprised the study group. One thousand seven hundred and eighty-three women attempting TOLAC with a neonate weighing 3,500 to 4,000 g comprised the control group. There were no clinically significant differences between the groups for maternal age, gestational age, parity, and vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rate. There were no significant differences in the rates of successful TOLAC (94 vs. 92.3%, p = 0.2, odds ratio [OR] = 0.8, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.5, 1.2), operative vaginal delivery (7.4 vs. 5.3%, p = 0.18, OR = 0.7, 95% CI: 0.4, 1.1), uterine rupture (0.4 vs. 0%, p = 0.6), PPH (3.2 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.36, OR = 1.4, 95% CI: 0.7, 2.7), OASI (0.8 vs. 0.2%, p = 0.1, OR = 3.6, 95% CI: 0.8, 1.6), Apgar's score <7 at 5 minutes (0 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.37), and umbilical artery pH <7.1 (0.5 vs. 0.7%, p = 1.0, OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.2, 3.2). Women with a neonate weighing >4,000 g had a significantly increased risk of shoulder dystocia (4 vs. 0.4%, p < 0.05, OR = 9.2 95% CI: 3.9, 22) CONCLUSION:  Women attempting TOLAC with a macrosomic neonate are not at increased risk for failed TOLAC, operative vaginal delivery, uterine rupture, PPH, or OASI but are at risk of shoulder dystocia. This information may aid in prenatal counseling for women considering TOLAC with a macrosomic fetus. · TOLAC with fetal macrosomia does not increase the risk of uterine rupture.. · TOLAC with fetal macrosomia is associated with high chances of VBAC.. · TOLAC with fetal macrosomia is not associated with adverse neonatal outcomes..

Lopian M ，Kashani-Ligumski L ，Cohen R ，Herzlich J ，Perlman S ... -  《-》

The Feasibility of a Trial of Labor after Two Cesarean Deliveries: Outcomes and Prognostic Factors for Success.

This study aimed to determine whether a trial of labor after two cesarean deliveries (TOLAC2) increases the risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes and identify prognostic factors for TOLAC2 success. A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a single medical center. The study group was comprised of women with a history of TOLAC2. Outcomes were compared with women undergoing trial of labor after one previous cesarean delivery (TOLAC1). The primary outcome was trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) success. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, uterine rupture, and combined adverse outcome (CAO; uterine rupture, postpartum hemorrhage, 5-minute Apgar score < 7, pH < 7.1). Logistic regression was used for the multivariate analysis to identify prognostic factors for TOLAC2 success. A total of 381 women who underwent TOLAC2 were compared with 3,635 women who underwent TOLAC1. Women attempting TOLAC2 were less likely to achieve vaginal births after cesarean delivery (VBAC; 80.8 and 92.5%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26-0.47; p < 0.001) and more likely to experience uterine rupture (0.8 vs. 0.2%; OR: 4.1; 95% CI: 1.1-15.9; p = 0.02) but not CAO (4.2 vs. 4.8%; OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.5-1.5; p = 0.3). TOLAC2 women with no previous vaginal deliveries had a lower chance of VBAC and a higher risk of uterine rupture compared with TOLAC1 women without a prior vaginal delivery (45.2 vs. 86.3%; OR: 0.13; 95% CI: 0.07-0.25; p < 0.001; 2.3 vs. 0%) and TOLAC2 women with a prior vaginal delivery (45.2 vs. 85.3%; OR: 0.14; 95% CI: 0.1-0.3; p < 0.0001; 2.4 vs. 0.6%; OR: 4.1; 95% CI: 0.4-46.3; p = 0.3). Multivariate analysis revealed that a history of vaginal delivery is an independent predictor of TOLAC2 success. Women attempting TOLAC2 are less likely to achieve VBAC and are at greater risk of uterine rupture compared with those attempting TOLAC1. Despite these risks, the overall success rates remain very high, and the absolute risk of adverse outcomes is still very low. Prior vaginal delivery seems to have a protective effect on TOLAC outcomes. These data should be used to counsel women and assist in decision-making when considering the mode of delivery in women with two previous cesarean sections. · TOLAC2 has a lower chance of success and higher rate of uterine rupture compared with TOLAC1.. · Previous vaginal delivery is an independent predictor of TOLAC2 success.. · Overall TOLAC2 outcomes are associated with high chances of success and low risk of uterine rupture..

Lopian M ，Perlman S ，Cohen R ，Rosen H ，Many A ，Kashani-Ligumsky L ... -  《-》

Grand multiparity, is it a help or a hindrance in a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC)?

Lopian M ，Kashani-Ligumski L ，Cohen R ，Herzlich J ，Vinnikov Y ，Perlman S ... -  《-》

[The outcome of trial of labor after cesarean section].

Qu ZQ ，Ma RM ，Xiao H ，Tian YQ ，Li BL ，Liang K ，Du MY ，Chen Z ，Geng L ，Yang MH ，Tao YP ，Zhu B ... -  《-》

Delivery for women with a previous cesarean: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF).

The primary cause of uterine scars is a previous cesarean. In women with a previous cesarean, the risks of maternal complications are rare and similar after a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and after an elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD), but the risk of uterine rupture is higher with TOLAC (level of evidence [LE]2). Maternal morbidity in women with previous cesareans is higher when TOLAC fails than when it leads to successful vaginal delivery (LE2). Although maternal morbidity increases progressively with the number of ERCD, maternal morbidity of TOLAC decreases with the number of successful previous TOLAC (LE2). The risk-benefit ratio considering the risks of short- and long-term maternal complications is favorable to TOLAC in most cases (LE3). Globally, neonatal complications are rare regardless of the mode of delivery for women with previous cesareans. The risks of fetal, perinatal, and neonatal mortality during TOLAC are low. Nonetheless, these risks are significantly higher than those associated with ERCD (LE2). The risks of mask ventilation, intubation for meconium-stained amniotic fluid, and neonatal sepsis all increase in TOLAC (LE2). The risk of transient respiratory distress increases in ERCD (LE2). To reduce this risk, and except in particular situations, ERCD must not be performed before 39 weeks (grade B). TOLAC is possible for women with a previous cesarean before 37 weeks, with 2 previous cesareans, with a uterine malformation, a low vertical incision or an unknown incision, with a myomectomy, postpartum fever, an interval of less than 6 months between the last cesarean delivery and the conception of the following pregnancy, if the obstetric conditions are favorable (professional consensus). ERCD is recommended in women with a scar in the uterine body (grade B) and a history of 3 or more cesareans (professional consensus). Ultrasound assessment of the risk of uterine rupture in women with uterine scars has not been shown to have any clinical utility and is therefore not recommended during pregnancy to help decide the mode of delivery (professional consensus). Use of X-ray pelvimetry to decide about TOLAC is associated with an increase in the repeat cesarean rate without any reduction in the rate of uterine rupture (LE2). It is unnecessary for deciding mode of delivery and for managing labor during TOLAC (grade C). TOLAC should be encouraged for women with a previous vaginal delivery either before or after the cesarean, a favorable Bishop score or spontaneous labor, and for preterm births (grade C). For women with a fetus with an estimated weight of more than 4500 g, especially in the absence of a previous vaginal delivery and those with supermorbid obesity (BMI>50), ERCD must be planned from the outset (grade C). For all of the other clinical situations envisioned (maternal age>35 years, diabetes, morbid obesity, prolonged pregnancy, breech presentation and twin pregnancy), TOLAC is possible but the available data do not allow specific guidelines about the choice of mode of delivery, in view of the low levels of proof (grade C). The decision about planned mode of delivery must be shared by the patient and her physician and made by the 8th month, taking into account the individual risk factors for TOLAC failure and uterine rupture (professional consensus). TOLAC is the preferred choice for women who do not have several risk factors (professional consensus). The availability onsite of an obstetrician and anesthetist must be pointed out to the patient. If the woman continues to prefer a repeat cesarean after adequate information and time to think about it, her preference should be honored (professional consensus). Labor should be induced in woman with a previous cesarean only for medical indications (professional consensus). Induction of labor increases the risk of uterine rupture, which can be estimated at 1% if oxytocin is used and 2% with vaginal prostaglandins (LE2). Mechanical methods of induction have not been studied sufficiently. Misoprostol appears to increase the risk of uterine rupture strongly (LE4). Based on the information now available, its use is not recommended (professional consensus). Routine use of internal tocodynamometry does not prevent uterine rupture (professional consensus). The increased risk of uterine rupture associated with oxytocin use is dose-dependent (LE3). In the active phase, it is recommended that the total duration of failure to progress should not exceed 3h; at that point, a cesarean should be performed (professional consensus). Epidural analgesia must be encouraged. The simple existence of a uterine scar is not an indication for a routine manual uterine examination after VBAC (grade C).

Sentilhes L ，Vayssière C ，Beucher G ，Deneux-Tharaux C ，Deruelle P ，Diemunsch P ，Gallot D ，Haumonté JB ，Heimann S ，Kayem G ，Lopez E ，Parant O ，Schmitz T ，Sellier Y ，Rozenberg P ，d'Ercole C ... -  《-》