Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Trial of labor after a previous cesarean delivery (TOLAC) has reduced the rate of cesarean sections (CS). Nevertheless, the widespread use of TOLAC has been limited by an increase in adverse outcomes, the most serious one being the risk of symptomatic uterine rupture, which is possibly associated with oxytocin. In this meta-analysis, we explored the risk association between oxytocin use and uterine rupture in TOLAC. Methods Multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were searched for cross-sectional studies reporting on TOLAC, oxytocin and uterine rupture, which were published between January 1986 and October 2019. The bias-corrected Hedge’s g was calculated as the effect size using the random-effects model. A two-sample Z test was used to compare the differences in synthetic rates between groups. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Quality of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) certainty ratings system. Results A total of 14 studies, which included 48,457 women who underwent TOLAC, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of vaginal birth after a cesarean section (VBAC) and the rate of uterine rupture in spontaneous labor were 74.3 and 0.7%, respectively. In addition, the pooled rate of VBAC and the rate of uterine rupture in the induction labor group was 60.7 and 2.2%, respectively. The women who had spontaneous labor had a significantly higher rate of VBAC ( p  = 0.001) and a lower rate of uterine rupture ( p  = 0.0003) compared to induced labor. The pooled rates of uterine rupture in women using oxytocin and women not using oxytocin in TOLAC were 1.4% and 0.5%, respectively, and the difference was significant ( p  = 0.0002). Also, the synthetic rate of uterine rupture in oxytocin augmentation among women with spontaneous labor and women who had a successful induction of labor were 1.7% and 2.2%, respectively, without significant difference ( p  = 0.443). Conclusions Women with induced labor had a higher risk of uterine rupture compared to women with spontaneous labor following TOLAC. Oxytocin use may increase this risk, which could be influenced by the process of induction or individual cervix condition. Consequently, simplified and standardized intrapartum management, precise protocol, and cautious monitoring of oxytocin use in TOLAC are necessary.

Purpose To explore the outcomes and factors influencing vaginal trial labor in primiparas with term singleton fetuses. Methods A retrospective analysis of 9174 first-time mothers who opted for a vaginal trial of labor at Peking University First Hospital from October 2019 to September 2022 was performed. The primary outcomes included the outcome of the trial of labor and influencing factors. Results Of the total population, the success rate of attempted vaginal delivery was 74.3% (6818/9174). Logistic regression analysis revealed that increasing maternal age (OR = 1.054; 95% CI = 1.239–2.316; p  < 0.001), gestational weight gain (OR = 1.033; 95% CI = 1.022–1.045; p  < 0.001), neonatal weight (OR = 1.971; 95% CI = 1.724–2.253; p  < 0.001), prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) ≥ 24 kg/m 2 (OR = 1.605; 95% CI = 1.411–1.825; p  < 0.001), prenatal BMI ≥ 24 kg/m 2 (OR = 1.326; 95% CI = 1.137–1.546; p  < 0.001), and induced labor (OR = 2.434; 95% CI = 2.187–2.708; p  < 0.001) increased the risk of failed vaginal delivery attempts, and labor analgesia reduced the risk of failed vaginal delivery attempts (OR = 0.356; 95% CI = 0.320–0.397; p  < 0.001). However, the use of assisted reproductive technology had no significant effect on the outcome of attempted vaginal delivery ( p  = 0.137). According to the partial regression coefficient, the area under the ROC curve was 0.710 (95% CI = 0.698–0.723), and the model passed the Hosmer–Lemeshow test and had good discrimination and calibration (χ 2  = 12.833, p  = 0.118). The postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) rate and overall neonatal asphyxia rate differed significantly between women who had different outcomes of vaginal trial labor. Conclusions There are many factors affecting the occurrence of abnormal delivery in primiparas. These independent factors can be used for prenatal evaluation.

Introduction Being able to counsel patients with one prior cesarean birth on the risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor after cesarean, (TOLAC) is an important aspect of prenatal care. Despite uterine rupture being a catastrophic event, there is currently no successful, validated prediction model to predict its occurrence. Material and Methods This was a cross‐sectional study using US national birth data between 2014 and 2021. The primary objective was to identify risk factors for uterine rupture during TOLAC and to generate a prediction model for uterine rupture among singleton gestations with one prior cesarean as their only prior birth. The secondary objective was to describe the maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with uterine rupture. The association of all candidate variables with uterine rupture was tested with uni‐ and multi‐variable logistic regression analyses. We included term and preterm singleton pregnancies with one prior birth that was cesarean birth (CB) with cephalic presentation undergoing TOLAC. We excluded pregnancies with major structural anomalies and chromosomal abnormalities. The Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) Curve was generated. p value <0.001 was considered statistically significant. Results Of the 270 329 singleton pregnancies with one prior CB undergoing TOLAC during the study period, there were 957 cases of uterine rupture (3.54 cases per 1000). Factors associated with uterine rupture in multivariable models were an interpregnancy interval < 18 months vs the reference interval of 24–35 months (aOR 1.55; 95% CI, 1.19–2.02), induction of labor (aOR 2.31; 95% CI, 2.01–2.65), and augmentation of labor (aOR 1.94; 95% CI, 1.70–2.21). Factors associated with reduced rates of uterine rupture were maternal age < 20 years (aOR 0.33, 95% CI 0.15–0.74) and 20–24 years (aOR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64–0.97) vs the reference of 25–29 years and gestational age at delivery 32–36 weeks vs the reference of 37–41 weeks (aOR 0.55, 95% CI 0.38–0.79). Incorporating these factors into a predictive model for uterine rupture yielded an area under the receiver‐operating curve of 0.66. Additionally, all analyzed maternal and neonatal morbidities were increased in the setting of uterine rupture compared to non‐rupture. Conclusions Uterine rupture prediction models utilizing TOLAC characteristics have modest performance. This study aimed to develop a uterine rupture prediction model for patients undergoing TOLAC with one prior cesarean birth as their only prior birth. Short interpregnancy interval, induction, and augmentation of labor were associated with increased risk for uterine rupture, while maternal age < 20 and gestational age at delivery 32–36 weeks were associated with decreased risk. However, incorporating these factors into a prediction model only had modest performance.

PurposeTo identify risk factors associated with the occurrence of complete uterine rupture (CUR) in comparison to partial uterine rupture (PUR) to further investigate to what extent a standardized definition is needed and what clinical implications can be drawn.MethodsBetween 2005 and 2017 cases with CUR and PUR at Charité University Berlin, Germany were retrospectively identified. Demographic, obstetric and outcome variables were analyzed regarding the type of rupture. Binary multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify risk factors associated with CUR. In addition, the intended route of delivery (trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) and elective repeat cesarean delivery (ERCD)), divided according to the type of rupture, was compared.Results92 cases with uterine rupture were identified out of a total of 64.063 births (0.14%). Puerperal complications were more frequent in CUR (67.9 versus 41.1%, p = 0.021). Multiparity ≥ 3 was more frequent in CUR (31 versus 10.7%, p = 0.020). Factors increasing the risk for CUR were parity ≥ 3 (OR = 3.8, p = 0.025), previous vaginal birth (OR = 4.4, p = 0.011), TOLAC (OR = 6.5, p < 0.001) and the use of oxytocin (OR = 2.9, p = 0.036). After multivariate analysis, the only independent risk factor associated with CUR was TOLAC (OR = 7.4, p = 0.017).ConclusionTOLAC is the only independent risk factor for CUR. After optimized antenatal counselling TOLAC and ERCD had comparable short-term maternal and fetal outcomes in a high resource setting. A high number of previous vaginal births does not eliminate the risk of uterine rupture. A clear distinction between CUR and PUR is essential to ensure comparability among studies.

Introduction In the attempt of a trial of labor after a cesarean section approximately one in 200 women experience a complete uterine rupture. As a complete uterine rupture is associated with an adverse perinatal outcome, data regarding subsequent pregnancies are needed to provide proper care and guidance to women with a complete uterine rupture when informing them of future possibilities. The objective of this study was to investigate the fetal and maternal outcomes in subsequent pregnancies after a complete uterine rupture. Material and Methods Retrospective population‐based case–control study. Denmark 1997–2017. A total of 175 women with complete uterine rupture during an attempted trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) at term (cases) and a corresponding group of 272 women with no uterine rupture during an attempted TOLAC at term (controls) were labeled as index deliveries. Index deliveries were included from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2008. From the date of the index delivery to December 31, 2017 the information on subsequent pregnancies and deliveries, and on referral to hospital with any obstetric or gynecological diagnosis were retrieved from the Danish Medical Birth Registry and National Patient Registry. Main outcome measures were miscarriage, perinatal death, neonatal morbidity, preterm birth, and recurrence of uterine rupture. Outcome measures were compared between cases and controls. Results After the index deliveries; there were 109 pregnancies and 70 deliveries after gestational age 22+0 weeks in the population of cases. In the population of controls, there were 183 pregnancies and 126 deliveries after 22+0 weeks. Cases had a significantly higher risk of miscarriage (odds ratio [OR] 3.99; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36–13.17). The incidence of uterine rupture was 8.6% among cases and 0.8% among controls (OR 11.7; 95% CI 1.36–543.1). Among cases, 98.6% had live‐born infants, and none of these had severe neonatal morbidity. No significant association was found between previous complete uterine rupture and preterm delivery, placenta previa, hysterectomy in relation to subsequent births, diagnosis such as meno/metrorrhagia, dysmenorrhea, or procedures such as hysteroscopy or hysterectomy. Conclusions In pregnancies following complete uterine rupture continuing after 22+0 weeks, maternal and fetal outcomes are good when managed promptly with cesarean delivery.

Objectives To estimate the success rates and risks of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC) based on the number of prior successful VBACs. Methods A retrospective cohort study of women with one cesarean section in the past who attempted vaginal delivery between 2013 and 2022, using data from our Medical Center registry. Outcomes were compared based on the number of prior successful VBACs. Results Among 2912 deliveries meeting the eligibility criteria, the success rate of VBAC increased with the number of prior VBACs: 73.2% for those with no prior VBAC, rising to 92.3%, 94.7%, 94.0%, and 97.0% for individuals with 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 or more prior VBACs, respectively. The history of at least one prior VBAC was associated with a 5.17-fold higher likelihood of achieving VBAC success. However, no significant differences in success rates were observed between groups with higher numbers of prior VBACs (≥ 2) compared to individuals with only one prior VBAC. In addition, the duration of hospitalization for both mother and neonate was longer in cases with no prior VBAC history. There was also a higher risk of requiring blood transfusion in the group without a prior history of VBAC. Conclusions Women with prior successful VBAC have a high likelihood of achieving another successful VBAC. After two prior VBACs, the success rate remains stable. In addition, women with one or more previous VBACs experience a reduced risk of blood transfusion and shorter hospitalization durations for both the mother and newborn.

Background The rates of cesarean section (CS) are increasing worldwide leading to an increased risk for maternal and neonatal complications in the subsequent pregnancy and labor. Previous studies have demonstrated that successful trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) is associated with the least maternal morbidity, but the risks of unsuccessful TOLAC exceed the risks of scheduled repeat CS. However, prediction of successful TOLAC is difficult, and only limited data on TOLAC in women with previous failed labor induction or labor dystocia exists. Our aim was to evaluate the success of TOLAC in women with a history of failed labor induction or labor dystocia, to compare the delivery outcomes according to stage of labor at time of previous CS, and to assess the risk factors for recurrent failed labor induction or labor dystocia. Methods This retrospective cohort study of 660 women with a prior CS for failed labor induction or labor dystocia undergoing TOLAC was carried out in Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between 2013 and 2015. Data on the study population was obtained from the hospital database and analyzed using SPSS. Results The rate of vaginal delivery was 72.9% and the rate of repeat CS for failed induction or labor dystocia was 17.7%. The rate of successful TOLAC was 75.6% in women with a history of labor arrest in the first stage of labor, 73.1% in women with a history of labor arrest in the second stage of labor, and 59.0% in women with previous failed induction. The adjusted risk factors for recurrent failed induction or labor dystocia were maternal height < 160 cm (OR 1.9 95% CI 1.1–3.1), no prior vaginal delivery (OR 8.3 95% CI 3.5–19.8), type 1 or gestational diabetes (OR 1.8 95% CI 1.0–3.0), IOL for suspected non-diabetic fetal macrosomia (OR 10.8 95% CI 2.1–55.9) and birthweight ≥4500 g (OR 3.3 95% CI 1.3–7.9). Conclusions TOLAC is a feasible option to scheduled repeat CS in women with a history of failed induction or labor dystocia. However, women with no previous vaginal delivery, maternal height < 160 cm, diabetes or suspected neonatal macrosomia (≥4500 g) may be at increased risk for failed TOLAC.

Background Cesarean section (C-section) rates are increasing globally, and repeated C-sections are associated with increased maternal morbidity. Trial of labor after C-section (TOLAC) is an approach to reduce the recurrence of C-sections. However, limited research exists on the impact of cesarean scars on labor duration in TOLAC, considering the termination of labor through C-section and selection bias. This study aimed to investigate the impact of cesarean scars on labor duration in TOLAC participants, accounting for potential confounding factors and biases. Methods This retrospective cohort study included 2,964 women who attempted vaginal birth at a single center in Japan from 2012 to 2021. The study categorized participants into TOLAC ( n  = 187) and non-TOLAC ( n  = 2,777) groups. Propensity scores were calculated based on 14 factors that could influence labor duration, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for labor duration, with and without IPTW adjustment. Sensitivity analyses used propensity score matching, bootstrapping, and interval censoring to address potential biases, including recall bias in the reported onset of labor. Results The unadjusted HR for labor duration in the TOLAC group compared to the non-TOLAC group was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.70–0.98, P  = 0.027), indicating a longer labor duration in the TOLAC group. After adjusting for confounding factors using IPTW, the HR was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.74–1.30, P  = 0.91), suggesting no significant difference in labor duration between the groups. Sensitivity analyses using propensity score matching, bootstrapping, and interval censoring yielded consistent results. These findings suggested that the apparent association between TOLAC and longer labor duration was because of confounding factors rather than TOLAC itself. Conclusions After adjusting for confounding factors and addressing potential biases, cesarean scars had a limited impact on labor duration in TOLAC participants. Maternal and fetal characteristics may have a more substantial influence on labor duration.

Background Women who are pregnant again after a prior cesarean section are faced with the choice between a vaginal trial and another cesarean section. Vaginal delivery is safer for mothers and babies, but face the risk of trial labor failure. Predictive models can evaluate the success rate of vaginal trial labor after cesarean section, which will help obstetricians and pregnant women choose the appropriate delivery method. Objective To review the existing prediction models of vaginal delivery after cesaean. Methods Seven databases, including CNKI, Wanfang Data, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, China Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, were searched for studies on the predictive model of VBAC from inception to July 20, 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted the data. The risk of bias and applicability of the included researches was evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Results Twenty-six studies that covered 26 models were included. The overall property of the included models was good, but validation of the included models was insufficient. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low, with 3 studies rated as having a low risk of bias and 23 studies rated as having a high risk of bias. The main predictors in the models were the Bishop score, history of vaginal delivery, neonatal weight, maternal age, and BMI. Conclusions Although a variety of prediction models have been developed globally, the methodology of these studies has limitations and the models have not been adequately validated. In the future, more prospective and high-quality research is needed to develop visual models to serve clinical work more effectively and conveniently. Obstetricians or midwives could use predictive models to help a woman choose the right delivery method.

Background Trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) in twin gestations has been associated with decreased rates of successful vaginal delivery compared to singleton pregnancies, with mixed results regarding maternal and neonatal morbidity. However, induction of labor (IOL) in this unique population has not yet been fully evaluated. Objective To assess success rates and maternal and neonatal outcomes in women with a twin gestation and a previous cesarean delivery undergoing IOL. Methods A retrospective cohort study including women with a twin gestation and one previous cesarean delivery undergoing a trial of labor between the years 2009–2020. Patients requiring IOL were compared to those with a spontaneous onset of labor. Results There were 53 patients who met the inclusion criteria: 31 had a spontaneous onset of labor (58%) and 22 required an IOL. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups apart from a history of labor arrest which was more common in the IOL group (40.9% vs. 9.6%, P = 0.006). A successful vaginal delivery occurred in all (100%) women with a spontaneous labor compared to 81% in the IOL group (p = 0.02). Secondary outcomes were comparable. A history of no previous vaginal delivery, maternal obesity, and IOL were associated with TOLAC failure. Conclusions IOL after cesarean delivery in twin gestation is associated with an increased risk of TOLAC failure compared to spontaneous onset of labor. However, no adverse neonatal or maternal outcomes were found. IOL in this high-risk population is feasible but patients should be counseled about the lower rate of success.