Severe maternal and perinatal outcomes from uterine rupture among women at term with a trial of labor

Barger, Mary K.; Nannini, Angela; Weiß, J.; Declercq, Eugene; Stubblefield, Phillip G.; Werler, Martha M.; Ringer, Steven A.

doi:10.1038/jp.2012.2

Cited by 20 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(13 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The level of obstetric intervention during TOLAC is an important consideration in the hospital context as well . It is well known that uterine rupture and its consequences are significantly less likely to occur in a spontaneous labor that progresses normally to a vaginal birth . However, women attempting a TOLAC in US hospitals are often confined to bed with continuous fetal monitoring, intravenous fluids, oxytocin (Pitocin) augmentation, and other obstetric interventions .…”

Section: Birth Site Considerations For Trial Of Labor After Cesareanmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…22 It is well known that uterine rupture and its consequences are significantly less likely to occur in a spontaneous labor that progresses normally to a vaginal birth. 19,62 However, women attempting a TOLAC in US hospitals are often confined to bed with continuous fetal monitoring, intravenous fluids, oxytocin (Pitocin) augmentation, and other obstetric interventions. 9,13 In the course of counseling, providers have a key role in educating women about the relationship between physiologic management practices, TOLAC safety, and VBAC success.…”

Section: Level Of Obstetric Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Counseling Women with a Previous Cesarean Birth: Toward a Shared Decision‐Making Partnership

Cox¹

2014

J Midwife Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pregnant women who had a previous cesarean birth must choose whether to have a repeat cesarean or to attempt a vaginal birth. Many of these women are candidates for a trial of labor. Current practice guidelines recommend that women should be thoroughly counseled during prenatal care about the benefits and harms of both a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and an elective repeat cesarean delivery and be offered the opportunity to make an informed decision about mode of birth in collaboration with their provider. The purpose of this article is to improve the process of counseling, decision making, and informed consent by increasing health care providers' knowledge about the essential elements of shared decision making. Factors that affect the decisions to be made and concepts that are critical for effective counseling are explored, including clinical considerations, women's perspectives, decision-making models, health literacy and numeracy, communicating risk, and the use of decision aids. Issues related to birth sites for TOLAC are also discussed, including access, safety, refusal of surgery, and clinical management.

show abstract

Section: Birth Site Considerations For Trial Of Labor After Cesareanmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Level Of Obstetric Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Counseling Women with a Previous Cesarean Birth: Toward a Shared Decision‐Making Partnership

Cox¹

2014

J Midwife Womens Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies examined interbirth interval (rather than interpregnancy interval), [43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53] presented crude results only (no adjustment for maternal age), 22,43,49,52,54,55 or did not account for a potential non-linear relationship between interpregnancy interval and health outcome by either assuming that interpregnancy interval had a linear association with risks of adverse outcomes or using a reference category with no upper bound. 20,22,46,47,[56][57][58] Nevertheless, the conclusions of the excluded studies are consistent with our findings that short interpregnancy interval is associated with increased risk of uterine rupture among women with prior caesarean birth 46,47,49 and placental abruption, 17,52 as well as decreased risk of preeclampsia or other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. 12,21,50,51,59,60 However, in contrast to the studies in our review, several excluded studies suggested that risks of obesity and gestational diabetes may actually increase with longer (not shorter) interpregnancy interval.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse maternal outcomes in high‐resource settings: An updated systematic review

Hutcheon

Nelson

Stidd

et al. 2018

Paediatric Perinatal Epid

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Currently, no federal guidelines provide recommendations on healthy birth spacing for women in the United States. This systematic review summarises associations between short interpregnancy intervals and adverse maternal outcomes to inform the development of birth spacing recommendations for the United States. Methods PubMed/Medline, POPLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and a previous systematic review were searched to identify relevant articles published from 1 January 2006 and 1 May 2017. Included studies reported maternal health outcomes following a short versus longer interpregnancy interval, were conducted in high‐resource settings, and adjusted estimates for at least maternal age. Two investigators independently assessed study quality and applicability using established methods. Results Seven cohort studies met inclusion criteria. There was limited but consistent evidence that short interpregnancy interval is associated with increased risk of precipitous labour and decreased risks of labour dystocia. There was some evidence that short interpregnancy interval is associated with increased risks of subsequent pre‐pregnancy obesity and gestational diabetes, and decreased risk of preeclampsia. Among women with a previous caesarean delivery, short interpregnancy interval was associated with increased risk of uterine rupture in one study. No studies reported outcomes related to maternal depression, interpregnancy weight gain, maternal anaemia, or maternal mortality. Conclusions In studies from high‐resource settings, short interpregnancy intervals are associated with both increased and decreased risks of adverse maternal outcomes. However, most outcomes were evaluated in single studies, and the strength of evidence supporting associations is low.

show abstract

“…The procedure for final study selection is shown in Figure . After careful assessment, only 15 studies were eligible for the systematic review, including 10 cohort studies , 1 cross‐sectional study, and 4 case–control studies …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of the effects of birth spacing after cesarean delivery on maternal and perinatal outcomes

Cao

Yao

et al. 2019

Intl J Gynecology & Obste

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Little is known about the association between birth spacing and subsequent pregnancy outcomes after cesarean delivery. Objectives To summarize the effects of birth spacing after previous caesarean on maternal and perinatal outcomes. Search strategy Four online databases were searched via a multistage search strategy. Selection criteria Studies assessing the effects of birth spacing on any adverse pregnancy outcome after cesarean were included. Data collection and analysis A narrative synthesis was completed. Main results Fifteen studies were included. Eight reported that interpregnancy interval (IPI) shorter than 6 months or birth interval (BI) shorter than 16–18 months increased the risk of uterine rupture during trial of labor after previous cesarean. Most studies found no association of birth spacing with vaginal delivery success following spontaneous labor, but the association with vaginal delivery after induced labor was less certain. BI shorter than 12 months was associated with increased risk of placenta previa and placental abruption. Few studies examined the effect of birth spacing after previous cesarean on perinatal outcomes. Conclusions IPI longer than 6–8 months or BI longer than 18 months was related to decreased risk of maternal morbidity and failed vaginal delivery after previous cesarean.

show abstract

Severe maternal and perinatal outcomes from uterine rupture among women at term with a trial of labor

Cited by 20 publications

References 17 publications

Counseling Women with a Previous Cesarean Birth: Toward a Shared Decision‐Making Partnership

Counseling Women with a Previous Cesarean Birth: Toward a Shared Decision‐Making Partnership

Short interpregnancy intervals and adverse maternal outcomes in high‐resource settings: An updated systematic review

Systematic review of the effects of birth spacing after cesarean delivery on maternal and perinatal outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About