O791 Outcome and success rate of vaginal birth after cesarean deliveries

2009 ◽  
Vol 107 ◽  
pp. S319-S320
Author(s):  
I. Refaei ◽  
M. Abd El Aziz
2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Jennifer W.H. Wong ◽  
Kurt D.N. Yoshino ◽  
Hyeong Jun Ahn ◽  
So Yung Choi ◽  
Ann L. Chang

AbstractBackgroundThe Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator, while accurate for candidates with high predicted success rates, is not as accurate for poor candidates. This study examines the calculator’s validity in an understudied multiracial cohort with a high proportion of poor candidates.MethodsThis retrospective study examined women with one or two prior cesarean deliveries who attempted VBAC at a single institution. Subjects were placed into quartiles based on MFMU-predicted success rates. For each quartile, actual and predicted success rates were compared. The calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was compared to the original AUC.ResultsThe study included 1604 women. Actual and predicted VBAC rates were similar in the lowest and highest quartile groups, 18.2% vs. 21.2% (n = 11, P > 0.99) and 87.1% vs. 88.5% (n = 1090, P = 0.14), respectively. In the 51–75% predicted success rate group, the actual VBAC rate was higher than the predicted rate, 69.9% vs. 65.5% (n = 394) but not statistically significant (P = 0.07). In the 25–50% predicted success rate group, the actual VBAC rate was significantly higher than the predicted rate 55.1% vs. 39.6% (n = 109, P = 0.002). The actual AUC was lower than the MFMU model, 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69–0.75] vs. 0.77 (95% CI 0.76–0.78) (P < 0.001).ConclusionThe MFMU VBAC calculator’s predicted success rates were comparable to actual success rates for candidates with predicted success rates >75%. As predicted success rates declined, the calculator was increasingly inaccurate and underestimated the success rate. Caution should be taken when using the MFMU VBAC calculator for poor candidates.


2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 464-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ron Beloosesky ◽  
Nizar Khatib ◽  
Nadir Ganem ◽  
Emad Matanes ◽  
Yuval Ginsberg ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 125 (4) ◽  
pp. 948-952 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torri D. Metz ◽  
Amanda A. Allshouse ◽  
Allison M. Faucett ◽  
William A. Grobman

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hua-Le Zhang ◽  
Liang-Hui Zheng ◽  
Li-Chun Cheng ◽  
Zhao-Dong Liu ◽  
Lu Yu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background We aimed to develop and validate a nomogram for effective prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) and guide future clinical application. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data from hospitalized pregnant women who underwent trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), at the Fujian Provincial Maternity and Children’s Hospital, between October 2015 and October 2017. Briefly, we included singleton pregnant women, at a gestational age above 37 weeks who underwent a primary cesarean section, in the study. We then extracted their sociodemographic data and clinical characteristics, and randomly divided the samples into training and validation sets. We employed the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression to select variables and construct VBAC success rate in the training set. Thereafter, we validated the nomogram using the concordance index (C-index), decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curves. Finally, we adopted the Grobman’s model to perform comparisons with published VBAC prediction models. Results Among the 708 pregnant women included according to inclusion criteria, 586 (82.77%) patients were successfully for VBAC. Multivariate logistic regression models revealed that maternal height (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.19), maternal BMI at delivery (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.00), fundal height (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.88), cervix Bishop score (OR, 3.27; 95% CI, 2.49 to 4.45), maternal age at delivery (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.98), gestational age (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.62) and history of vaginal delivery (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.42 to 6.48) were independently associated with successful VBAC. The constructed predictive model showed better discrimination than that from the Grobman’s model in the validation series (c-index 0.906 VS 0.694, respectively). On the other hand, decision curve analysis revealed that the new model had better clinical net benefits than the Grobman’s model. Conclusions VBAC will aid in reducing the rate of cesarean sections in China. In clinical practice, the TOLAC prediction model will help improve VBAC’s success rate, owing to its contribution to reducing secondary cesarean section.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document