Vaginal delivery following previous caesarean section (R.C.O.G. Table XVIII)

1958 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 55-56
Keyword(s):  
Caesarean Section ◽  
Vaginal Delivery ◽  
Previous Caesarean Section

scholarly journals Pregnancy Outcome of Single Previous cesarean Section

1970 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Jha
Keyword(s):  
Caesarean Section ◽  
Vaginal Delivery ◽  
Apgar Score ◽  
Postpartum Hemorrhage ◽  
Elective Caesarean Section ◽  
Previous Caesarean Section ◽  
Cephalopelvic Disproportion ◽  
Main Indication ◽  
Assisted Delivery ◽  
Vacuum Delivery

Background: The main aim of this study is to determine the maternal and fetal outcome of pregnancy among women with one previous caesarean section at term in relation to vaginal delivery, post partum complication, neonatal complication like low Apgar score, fetal weight and admission in special baby unit. Methods: This is a prospective and descriptive study done in a sample size of 100. Inclusion criteria were term pregnancy, single live fetus with cephalic presentation with one previous caesarean section. During study period total number of obstetric admissions was 3546 and 115 cases were admitted with previous one caesarean section. Result: Out of 100 cases, 31 cases had vaginal delivery and 69 cases had caesarean section. Among 31 vaginal deliveries, 24 cases had spontaneous vaginal delivery and 7 had assisted delivery with vacuum, main indication of vacuum delivery was to cut short the second stage of labor that was in 5(71.43%) cases. Among 69 caesarean section cases, 51 had emergency caesarean section and 18 had elective caesarean section and cephalopelvic disproportion was the main indication in both the groups. Most common complication was scar dehiscence and postpartum hemorrhage. There were two still births in each group and one minute APGAR score was slightly better in caesarean section. Conclusions: Patients with previous caesarean section are at high risk of repeat emergency or elective caesarean section. About one in three patients with previous caesarean section delivered vaginally. In the present study postpartum hemorrhage was the commonest complication, which was found in caesarean section, and only  one puerperal pyrexia was seen in case of vaginal delivery. Key words: Cephalopelvic disproportion, Premature rupture of membrane, Septicemia, Vacuum delivery   DOI: 10.3126/jnhrc.v7i1.2275 Journal of Nepal Health Research Council Vol. 7, No. 1, 2009 April 25-28

scholarly journals Reduced pregnancy and live birth rates after in vitro fertilization in women with previous Caesarean section: a retrospective cohort study

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 595-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
J Vissers ◽  
T C Sluckin ◽  
C C Repelaer van Driel-Delprat ◽  
R Schats ◽  
C J M Groot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Caesarean Section ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Vaginal Delivery ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Clinical Pregnancy ◽  
Fertility Treatment ◽  
Previous Caesarean Section ◽  
Birth Rates ◽  
Caesarean Scar ◽  
Live Birth Rates

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Does a previous Caesarean section affect reproductive outcomes, including live birth, in women after IVF or ICSI? SUMMARY ANSWER A previous Caesarean section impairs live birth rates after IVF or ICSI compared to a previous vaginal delivery. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Rates of Caesarean sections are rising worldwide. Late sequelae of a Caesarean section related to a niche (Caesarean scar defect) include gynaecological symptoms and obstetric complications. A systematic review reported a lower pregnancy rate after a previous Caesarean section (RR 0.91 CI 0.87–0.95) compared to a previous vaginal delivery. So far, studies have been unable to causally differentiate between problems with fertilisation, and the transportation or implantation of an embryo. Studying an IVF population allows us to identify the effect of a previous Caesarean section on the implantation of embryos in relation to a previous vaginal delivery. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION We retrospectively studied the live birth rate in women who had an IVF or ICSI treatment at the IVF Centre, Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, between 2006 and 2016 with one previous delivery. In total, 1317 women were included, of whom 334 had a previous caesarean section and 983 had previously delivered vaginally. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS All secondary infertile women, with only one previous delivery either by caesarean section or vaginal delivery, were included. If applicable, only the first fresh embryo transfer was included in the analyses. Patients who did not intend to undergo embryo transfer were excluded. The primary outcome was live birth. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used with adjustment for possible confounders ((i) age; (ii) pre-pregnancy BMI; (iii) pre-pregnancy smoking; (iv) previous fertility treatment; (v) indication for current fertility treatment: (a) tubal, (b) male factor and (c) endometriosis; (vi) embryo quality; and (vii) endometrial thickness), if applicable. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE Baseline characteristics of both groups were comparable. Live birth rates were significantly lower in women with a previous caesarean section than in women with a previous vaginal delivery, 15.9% (51/320) versus 23.3% (219/941) (OR 0.63 95% CI 0.45–0.87) in the ITT analyses. The rates were also lower for ongoing pregnancy (20.1 versus 28.1% (OR 0.64 95% CI 0.48–0.87)), clinical pregnancy (25.7 versus 33.8% (OR 0.68 95% CI 0.52–0.90)) and biochemical test (36.2 versus 45.5% (OR 0.68 95% CI 0.53–0.88)). The per protocol analyses showed the same differences (live birth rate OR 0.66 95% CI 0.47–0.93 and clinical pregnancy rate OR 0.72 95% CI 0.54–0.96). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION This study is limited by its retrospective design. Furthermore, 56 (16.3%) cases lacked data regarding delivery outcomes, but these were equally distributed between the two groups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The lower clinical pregnancy rates per embryo transfer indicate that implantation is hampered after a caesarean section. Its relation with a possible niche (caesarean scar defect) in the uterine caesarean scar needs further study. Our results should be discussed with clinicians and patients who consider an elective caesarean section. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) Not applicable. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER This study has been registered in the Dutch Trial Register (Ref. No. NL7631 http://www.trialregister.nl).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document