Background: As cesarean birth rates continue to rise, more women are faced with the choice of planning a vaginal delivery or a repeat cesarean section after a previous cesarean section. The objective of this prospective study was to study the morbidities and mortality of women attempting a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) versus elective repeat cesarean section (El-RCS).Methods: Prospective data was recorded on management practices, associated complications and morbidity & mortality for a period of 8 months on 15664 consecutive cases of previous cesarean section reporting at 30 medical colleges/ teaching hospitals for delivery.Results: A trial of labor was planned in 25.8% (4035) women and 34.5% (5399) women underwent elective repeat cesarean section and rest had emergency repeat cesarean section. Overall maternal morbidity due to any cause was 20.7% among El-RCS as compared to 14.2% in TOLAC which was statistically significant (OR: 1.57, CI: 1.41-1.76, P=0.00). Blood loss of more than 1000ml was around 8.0% among TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 8.8% (OR: 0.89, CI: 0.77-1.94, p=0.14 not statistically significant). Blood transfusion was given in 3.7% in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was given in 6.5% (OR: 0.56, CI: 0.45-0.68, p=0.00 highly significant). Complication like dehiscence of scar was similar in both groups. Post-operative complication were seen in 2.8% cases in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 5.8% (OR: 0.47, CI: 0.38-0.59, p=0.00 highly significant). Uterine rupture was 0.3% in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 0.7% (OR: 0.43, CI: 0.21-0.87, p=0.009 statistically significant). Maternal mortality was reported in 0.2% cases of TOLAC as compared to 0.1% cases in El-RCS (p=0.17) which was not statistically significant.Conclusions: Maternal morbidity was found to be more in elective repeat cesarean section than trial of labor after cesarean section.
Is emergency cesarean section more risky than elective cesarean section in women with previous cesarean section?
