4.5 Article

Prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean for labor dystocia by sonographic estimated fetal weight

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.13946

Keywords

cesarean section; dystocia; outcome; trial of labor after cesarean delivery; vaginal birth after cesarean

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Among women with prior labor dystocia and no previous vaginal delivery, sEFW characteristics did not predict the success or failure of TOLAC.
Objective To estimate the association of the weight difference between the index trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) sonographic estimated fetal weight (sEFW) and prior delivery birth weight with TOLAC success rate among women with previous labor dystocia and no prior vaginal delivery. Methods A retrospective cohort study including all women with prior cesarean for labor dystocia and no prior vaginal delivery undergoing TOLAC during between March 2011 and June 2020 with a sEFW within 1 week from delivery. Results Overall, 168 women were included, of those 107 (63.7%) successfully delivered vaginally. The mean sEFW and mean birth weight were lower in the TOLAC success group (P = 0.010 and P = 0.013, respectively). The rate of higher sEFW in the current delivery compared with the previous delivery did not differ between study groups. The rate of higher TOLAC birth weight was lower in the TOLAC success group (odds ratio 0.30; 95% confidence interval 0.15-0.58). In multivariable regression analysis, maternal age older than 30 years, induction of labor, and higher birth weight were independently negatively associated with TOLAC success (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.27 [0.10-0.70], 0.27 [0.08-0.90], and 0.43 [0.19-0.94]; P = 0.008, P = 0.034, and P = 0.035, respectively). Conclusions sEFW characteristics did not predict the success or failure of TOLAC among women with prior labor dystocia and no previous vaginal delivery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available