Induction of labour with previous caesarean delivery: Where do we stand?

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 636-641

  Kayani, Salma I ^a   Alfirevic, Zarko ^b  

^a ARROWE PARK HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Induction of labour labor; Scar dehiscence; Trial of scar; Uterine rupture; VBAC

Indexed keywords

MISOPROSTOL; OXYTOCIN; PROSTAGLANDIN E2;

CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DECISION MAKING; ELECTIVE SURGERY; HUMAN; LABOR INDUCTION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDLINE; OBSTETRIC CARE; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; RISK FACTOR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UTERUS RUPTURE;

CESAREAN SECTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABOR, INDUCED; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; PREGNANCY; TRIAL OF LABOR; UTERINE RUPTURE; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

EID: 33750979010     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3280105a4e     Document Type: Review

References (38)

1. Benbow A, Semple D, Maresh M. Effective procedures in maternity care suitable for audit. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 1997. p. 34.
2. American College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Practice Bulletin Number 54: Vaginal birth after caesarean. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104: 203-212.
3. ACOG Task Force on Caesarean Delivery Rates. Evaluation of caesarean delivery. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Washington, DC: ACOG; 2000.
4. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. SOGC clinical practice guidelines. Guidelines for vaginal birth after previous caesarean birth. Number 155, February 2005. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2005; 8:319-331. Comprehensive guideline with graded evidence dealing with VBAC.
5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Induction of labour. Evidence Based Clinical Guideline No 9, Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit, RCOG, June 2001. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2001.
6. Vause S, Macintosh M. Use of prostaglandins to induce labour in women with a caesarean section scar. BMJ 1999; 318:1056-1058.
7. Mozurkewich EL, Hutton EK. Elective repeat caesarean delivery versus trial of labour: A meta-analysis of literature from 1989 to 1999. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183:1187-1197.
8. Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, Martin DP. Risk of uterine rupture during labour among women with a prior caesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:3-8.
9. Weiss J, Nannini A, Fogerty S, Sachs B. Use of hospital discharge data to monitor uterine rupture - Massachusetts, 1990-1997; US Department of Health & Human Services. MMWR Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep 2000; 49: 245-248.
10. Guise JM, Berlin M, McDonagh M, et al. Safety of vaginal birth after caesarean: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 103:420-429.
11. Guise JM, McDonagh MS, Osterweil P, et al. Systematic review of the incidence and consequences of uterine rupture in women with previous caesarean section. BMJ 2004; 329:19-25.
12. Gyamfi C, Juhasz G, Gyamfi P, Stone J. Increased success of trial of labour after previous vaginal birth after caesarean. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104:715-719.
13. Kwee A, Bots ML, Visser GHA, Bruinse HW. Uterine rupture and its complications in the Netherlands: A prospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006; Mar 9 [Epub ahead of print] This descibes a thorough prospective nationwide Dutch study to establish the incidence of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality after uterine rupture.
14. Hofmeyr GJ, Say L, Gulmezoglu AM. WHO systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity: the prevalence of uterine rupture. BJOG 2005; 112:1221-1228. This is a comprehensive systematic review of studies addressing the worldwide prevalence of uterine rupture.
15. Kayani SI, Alfirevic Z. Uterine rupture after induction of labour in women with previous caesarean section. BJOG 2005; 112:451-455. This is a retrospective cohort review identifying incidence of uterine rupture in induction of labour and assessing the risk in the wake of history of previous vaginal delivery.
16. Wen SW, Rusen ID, Walker M, et al. Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labour and elective caesarean section among women with previous caesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:1263-1269.
17. Paré E, Quiňones JN, Macones GA. Vaginal birth after caesarean section versus repeat elective section: assessment of maternal downstream health outcomes. BJOG 2006; 113:75-85. The authors describe the valuable application of two decision models to compare maternal implications of strategies of VBAC versus elective repeat caesarean section; the probability estimates for VBAC success rate and risk of associated complications are extracted from literature.
18. McDonagh MS, Osterweil P, Guise JM. The benefits and risks of inducing labour in patients with prior caesarean delivery: a systematic review. BJOG 2005; 112:1007-1015. This systematic review evaluates the risks and benefits of IOL in women with previous caesarean deliveries in comparison to those undergoing spontaneous labour.
19. Paul RH, Phelan JP, Yeh SY. Trial of labour in the patient with a prior caesarean birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985; 151:297-304.
20. Meehan FP, Bueke G. Trial of labour following prior section: a 5 year prospective study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1989; 31:109-117.
21. Dunn EA, O'Herlihy C. Comparison of maternal satisfaction following vaginal delivery after caesarean section and caesarean section after previous vaginal delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005; 121:56-60. This describes the only questionnaire-based qualitative study assessing maternal satisfaction following VBAC and caesarean section after vaginal delivery.
22. Alfirevic Z, Weeks A. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (2):CD001338. This Cochrane review assesses the effectiveness and safety of oral misoprostol used for labour induction in women with a viable fetus in the third trimester of pregnancy.
23. Macones GA, Peipert J, Nelson DB, et al. Maternal complications with vaginal birth after caesarean delivery: A multicentre study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193:1656-1662. This nested case-control evaluated the role of previous vaginal delivery in relation to outcome of VBAC.
24. Miller D, Davis D. Use of Atad catheter for the induction of labour in women who have had a previous caesarean section: case series. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 45:325-327. Case series using mechanical method of IOL in women with previous caesarean section.
25. Kotaba S, Volfson M, Taragova S, et al. Induction of labour in women with previous caesarean section using the double balloon device. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2001; 80:1041-4102.
26. Landon MB, Leindecker S, Spong CY, et al. The MFMU Caesarean Registry: Factors affecting the success of trial of labour after previous caesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193:1016-1023. Multicentre prospective observational study to identify factors influencing the likelihood of a successful trial of labour.
27. Smith GCS, Pell JP, Dobbie R. Factors predisposing to perinatal death related to uterine rupture during attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2004; 375:375-380.
28. Sheiner E, Levy A, Katz M, Mazor M. Short stature: an independent risk factor for Caesarean delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005; 120:175-178. This population-based study compared pregnancy outcome of patients with and without short stature.
29. Usha Kiran TS, Chui YK, Bethel J, Bahl PS. Is gestational age an independent variable affecting uterine scar rupture rates? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006; 126:68-71. This population-based study evaluated the influence of gestational age on uterine scar rupture.
30. Hammoud A, Hendler I, Gauthier RJ, et al. The effect of gestational age on trial of labour after caesarean section. Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004; 15:202-206.
31. Lu GC, Rouse DJ, DuBard M, et al. The effect of the increasing prevalence of maternal obesity on perinatal morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185:845-849.
32. Cnattingius R, Cnattingius S, Notzon FC. Obstacles to reducing cesarean rates in a low-cesarean setting: the effect of maternal age, height, and weight: trends and consequences. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92:501-506.
33. Chauhan SP, Mangann E, Carroll CS, et al. Mode of delivery for the morbidly obese with prior caesarean delivery: vaginal versus repeat caesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185:349-354.
34. Edwards RK, Harnsberger DS, Johnson IM, et al. Deciding on route of delivery for obese women with a prior caesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:954-957.
35. Carroll CS Sr, Magann EF, Chauhan SP, et al. Vaginal birth after caesarean section versus elective repeat caesarean delivery: weight-based outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188:1516-1520.
36. Sheiner E, Levy A, Menes TS, et al. Maternal obesity as an independent risk factor for caesarean delivery. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2004; 18:196-201.
37. Goodall PT, Ahn JT, Chapa JB, Hibbard JU. Obesity as a risk factor for failed trial of labour in patients with previous caesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192:1423-1426. This retrospective chart review identifies obesity as an independent risk factor for failed induction of labour in women with previous caesarean delivery.
38. Bujold E, Hammoud A, Schild C, et al. The role of maternal body mass index in outcomes of vaginal birth after caesarean. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193:1517-1521. The authors describe the use of a perinatal database to ascertain maternal body mass index as an independent factor lowering the success of VBAC.