Myasthenia gravis and pregnancy

Myasthenia Gravis with pregnancy is a rare concomitance. This case report describes successful outcome of all pregnancies in a lady with this problem. The management is described.

Epidural anesthesia in a parturient with neurofibromatosis type 2 undergoing cesarean section

Neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2) is a rare condition only recently recognized. We present a case describing successful regional analgesia in a parturient with NF2 after thorough imaging revealed no tumors within the epidural space. The presence of tumors within the spinal cord and nerve roots and their potential enlargement during pregnancy make routine neuraxial anesthesia hazardous in patients with NF2. Lumbosacral imaging before performing regional anesthesia is recommended.

Safety and Efficacy of Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Attempts at or Beyond 40 Weeks of Gestation

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) failure and major complications in women attempting VBAC before and after the estimated date of delivery (EDD) METHODS: This was a 5-year retrospective cohort study in 17 university and community hospitals of women with at least 1 prior cesarean delivery. Women who attempted VBAC before the EDD were compared with those at or beyond 40 weeks of gestation. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between delivery beyond the EDD and VBAC failure or complication rate.

RESULTS

A total of 11,587 women in the cohort attempted VBAC. Women past 40 weeks of gestation were more likely to have a failed VBAC. After controlling for confounders, the increased risk of a failed VBAC beyond 40 weeks remained significant (31.3% compared with 22.2%, odds ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.24-1.50). The risk of uterine rupture (1.1% compared with 1.0%) or overall morbidity (2.7% compared with 2.1%) was not significantly increased in the women attempting VBAC beyond the EDD. When the cohort was defined as 41 weeks or more of gestation, the risk of a failed VBAC was again significantly increased (35.4% compared with 24.3%, odds ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 1.20-1.53), but the risk of uterine rupture or overall morbidity was not increased.

CONCLUSION

Women beyond 40 weeks of gestation can safely attempt VBAC, although the risk of VBAC failure is increased.

Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) attempt in twin pregnancies: is it safe?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the rate of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) attempt, VBAC failure, and major maternal adverse outcomes in women with a previous cesarean with twin or singleton pregnancies.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study between the years 1996 and 2000. Subjects were identified by ICD-9 code. Trained research nurses collected medical record data on the outcome of VBAC attempts, and clinical outcomes, including uterine rupture and major operative injuries. We used bivariate and multivariable techniques to assess the association between twins and the outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 25,005 patients with at least 1 previous cesarean, there were 535 twin pregnancies and 24,307 singleton pregnancies. Compared with patients with singleton gestations, patients with twins were less likely to attempt a VBAC (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.3, 95% CI 0.2-0.4), but no more likely to have a VBAC failure (AOR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8-1.6), a uterine rupture (AOR 1.2, 95% CI 0.3-4.6), or a major maternal morbidity (AOR 1.6, 95% CI 0.7-3.7).

CONCLUSION

Women with twin gestations are less likely to attempt a VBAC, but they are no more likely to fail a VBAC trial or experience a major morbid event compared with women with singleton gestations.

Incidence of significant adhesions at repeat cesarean section and the relationship to method of prior peritoneal closure

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of peritoneal closure at prior cesarean section on the occurrence of abdomino-pelvic adhesions at subsequent cesarean section.

STUDY DESIGN

An observational chart review study was performed involving 191 cases of repeat cesarean section occurring from January 2001 through July 30, 2002. An adhesion score was created according to the following: a grade 1 score was assigned when no adhesions were present, a grade 2 when adhesions were present but no surgery required, a grade 3 when adhesiolysis was required and there was inability to exteriorize the uterus, and a grade 4 when adhesiolysis was required prior to delivery. Scores were assigned and tabulated as a result of the review of the operative records of 191 cases. When available, the operative record of prior cesarean section was examined to determine if visceral and parietal peritoneal closure had been performed at the prior operation.

RESULTS

During the year and a half for which data were examined, significant abdominopelvic adhesions (grades 3 and 4) were encountered 21% of the time (40 of 191) at repeat cesarean section. Prior peritoneal closure resulted in significant adhesions in 1 of 18 patients compared to 17 of 40 patients when no prior peritoneal closure was recorded (Fisher's exact probability = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

While preliminary, in the absence of any substantive benefit or published data regarding adhesionformation in cesarean section that contradict this finding, the practice of nonclosure of visceral and parietal peritoneum at cesarean section should be questioned.

Predicting cesarean section and uterine rupture among women attempting vaginal birth after prior cesarean section

BACKGROUND

There is currently no validated method for antepartum prediction of the risk of failed vaginal birth after cesarean section and no information on the relationship between the risk of emergency cesarean delivery and the risk of uterine rupture.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We linked a national maternity hospital discharge database and a national registry of perinatal deaths. We studied 23,286 women with one prior cesarean delivery who attempted vaginal birth at or after 40-wk gestation. The population was randomly split into model development and validation groups. The factors associated with emergency cesarean section were maternal age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.22 per 5-y increase, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16 to 1.28), maternal height (adjusted OR = 0.75 per 5-cm increase, 95% CI: 0.73 to 0.78), male fetus (adjusted OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.29), no previous vaginal birth (adjusted OR = 5.08, 95% CI: 4.52 to 5.72), prostaglandin induction of labor (adjusted OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.26 to 1.60), and birth at 41-wk (adjusted OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.42) or 42-wk (adjusted OR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.62) gestation compared with 40-wk. In the validation group, 36% of the women had a low predicted risk of caesarean section (< 20%) and 16.5% of women had a high predicted risk (> 40%); 10.9% and 47.7% of these women, respectively, actually had deliveries by caesarean section. The predicted risk of caesarean section was also associated with the risk of all uterine rupture (OR for a 5% increase in predicted risk = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.31) and uterine rupture associated with perinatal death (OR for a 5% increase in predicted risk = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.73). The observed incidence of uterine rupture was 2.0 per 1,000 among women at low risk of cesarean section and 9.1 per 1,000 among those at high risk (relative risk = 4.5, 95% CI: 2.6 to 8.1). We present the model in a simple-to-use format.

CONCLUSIONS

We present, to our knowledge, the first validated model for antepartum prediction of the risk of failed vaginal birth after prior cesarean section. Women at increased risk of emergency caesarean section are also at increased risk of uterine rupture, including catastrophic rupture leading to perinatal death.

SOGC clinical practice guidelines. Guidelines for vaginal birth after previous caesarean birth. Number 155 (Replaces guideline Number 147), February 2005

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based guidelines for the provision of a trial of labor (TOL) after Caesarean section.

OUTCOME

Fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality associated with vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) and repeat Caesarean section.

EVIDENCE

MEDLINE database was searched for articles published from January 1, 1995, to February 28, 2004, using the key words "vaginal birth after Caesarean (Cesarean) section". The quality of evidence is described using the Evaluation of Evidence criteria outlined in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Provided there are no contraindications, a woman with 1 previous transverse low-segment Caesarean section should be offered a trial of labor (TOL) with appropriate discussion of maternal and perinatal risks and benefits. The process of informed consent with appropriate documentation should be an important part of the birth plan in a woman with a previous Caesarean section (II-2B). 2. The intention of a woman undergoing a TOL after Caesarean section should be clearly stated, and documentation of the previous uterine scar should be clearly marked on the prenatal record (II-2B). 3. For a safe labor after Caesarean section, a woman should deliver in a hospital where a timely Caesarean section is available. The woman and her health care provider must be aware of the hospital resources and the availability of obstetric, anesthetic, pediatric, and operating-room staff (II-2A). 4. Each hospital should have a written policy in place regarding the notification and (or) consultation for the physicians responsible for a possible timely Caesarean section (III-B). 5. In the case of a TOL after Caesarean, an approximate time frame of 30 min should be considered adequate in the set-up of an urgent laparotomy (IIIC). 6. Continuous electronic fetal monitoring of women attempting a TOL after Caesarean section is recommended (II-2A). 7. Suspected uterine rupture requires urgent attention and expedited laparotomy to attempt to decrease maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality (II-2A). 8. Oxytocin augmentation is not contraindicated in women undergoing a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 9. Medical induction of labor with oxytocin may be associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture and should be used carefully after appropriate counseling (II-2B). 10. Medical induction of labor with prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) is associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture and should not be used except in rare circumstances and after appropriate counseling (II-2B). 11. Prostaglandin E1 (misoprostol) is associated with a high risk of uterine rupture and should not be used as part of a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 12. A foley catheter may be safely used to ripen the cervix in a woman planning a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 13. The available data suggest that a trial of labor in women with more than 1 previous Caesarean section is likely to be successful but is associated with a higher risk of uterine rupture (II-2B). 14. Multiple gestation is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 15. Diabetes mellitus is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 16. Suspected fetal macrosomia is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 17. Women delivering within 18-24 months of a Caesarean section should be counseled about an increased risk of uterine rupture in labor (II-2B). 18. Postdatism is not a contraindication to a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 19. Every effort should be made to obtain the previous Caesarean section operative report to determine the type of uterine incision used. In situations where the scar is unknown, information concerning the circumstances of the previous delivery is helpful in determining the likelihood of a low transverse incision. If the likelihood of a lower transverse incision is high, a TOL after Caesarean section can be offered (II-2B).

VALIDATION

These guidelines were approved by the Clinical Practice Obstetrics and Executive Committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

Use of the Atad catheter for the induction of labour in women who have had a previous Caesarean section - a case series

Abstract The induction of labour of women with an unfavourable cervix who have had a previous Caesarean section, is challenging. Eight women who had a Caesarean section in a previous pregnancy had labour induced with an Atad catheter. Six out of eight women achieved labour, and two out of these six women had a vaginal delivery. An Atad catheter is an option for women needing induction of labour with an unfavourable cervix who have had a Caesarean section previously and are motivated to have a vaginal delivery.

Peritoneal Closure at Primary Cesarean Delivery and Adhesions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of parietal peritoneal closure at cesarean delivery on adhesion formation.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study of women undergoing first repeat cesarean delivery was designed. All surgeons were asked immediately after surgery to score the severity and location of adhesions. Patient records were then abstracted to assess prior surgical technique, including parietal peritoneal closure, other attributes of first surgery, and patient characteristics. Exclusion criteria included adhesions, other surgery, or use of permanent suture at the first cesarean, unavailable first postoperative note and course, wound infection or breakdown following first surgery, intervening pelvic surgery, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, and steroid-dependent disease. The chi2 test and multivariable logistic regression were used for statistical comparison and analysis. A total of 128 patients was required to have 80% power to detect a 50% reduction in adhesions when the parietal peritoneum was left open.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-three patients were enrolled. Prior parietal peritoneal closure was associated with significantly fewer dense and filmy adhesions (52% versus 73%, P = .006) and significantly fewer dense adhesions (30% versus 45%, P = .043). When controlling for potential confounding variables, including prior infection, visceral peritoneal closure, rectus muscle closure, payor status, ethnicity, maternal age, gestational diabetes, and labor, parietal peritoneal closure at primary cesarean delivery was 5-fold protective against all adhesions (odds ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.08-0.49), and 3-fold protective against dense adhesions (odds ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.79). Omental-fascial adhesions were decreased most consistently.

CONCLUSION

Parietal peritoneal closure at primary cesarean delivery was associated with significantly fewer dense and filmy adhesions. The practice of nonclosure of the parietal peritoneum at cesarean delivery should be questioned.

Neonatal impact of elective repeat cesarean delivery at term: a comment on patient choice cesarean delivery

OBJECTIVE

The object of this study was to compare neonatal outcomes of term uncomplicated pregnancies delivered by scheduled repeat cesarean with outcomes of babies born to mothers intending to deliver vaginally.

STUDY DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study describes neonatal outcomes of term uncomplicated pregnancies. Neonates of mothers intending to deliver vaginally (n = 3134) are compared with neonates born by elective repeat cesarean delivery prior to labor (n = 117).

RESULTS

Neonates born by elective repeat cesarean are more frequently admitted to advanced care nurseries than infants born to mothers intending to deliver vaginally (risk ratio 3.58, 95% confidence interval 3.35-3.58).

CONCLUSION

The decision to undergo scheduled cesarean delivery appears to negatively impact immediate neonatal outcomes.

[Uterovesical fistula]

INTRODUCTION

Uterovesical fistulas belong to the least common types of urogenital fistulas. Although uncommon, they cannot be considered a rarity in view of about 800 published cases in the literature. They are most frequently caused by repeated caesarean sections, which are increasing, and their complications can be expected to increase as well.

CASE REPORT

During the second caesarean section of a 31-year-old woman, the urinary bladder was opened and subsequently closed by a urologic surgeon. In the following weeks and months, the patient suffers from urinary incontinence in response to bladder filling, cyclic hematuria (menouria) and recurrent cystitis. After multiple examinations without establishing a diagnosis, an uterovesical fistula was suggested by cystoscopy and confirmed by cystography. The fistula, which measured 2 cm in diameter, was successfully closed by transperitoneal approach without interposition of omentum.

CONCLUSION

Uterovesical fistulas are to be expected to increase due to an increasing rate of repeated caesarean sections. They can be suggested by their typical symptoms, easily diagnosed by imaging examinations and successfully treated by transperitoneal closure.

Evidence-based vaginal birth after Caesarean section

Caesarean section rates are rising globally. Whether vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) is safe and under what circumstances is increasingly important. This chapter reviews the literature about the risks of VBAC, patient and management factors that may alter risk, and discusses ongoing research as well as suggestions for improving future research.

Guidelines for Vaginal Birth After Previous Caesarean Birth

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based guidelines for the provision of a trial of labour (TOL) after Caesarean section.

OUTCOME

Fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality associated with vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC) and repeat Caesarean section.

EVIDENCE

MEDLINE database was searched for articles published from January 1, 1995, to February 28, 2004, using the key words "vaginal birth after Caesarean (Cesarean) section". The quality of evidence is described using the Evaluation of Evidence criteria outlined in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Exam.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Provided there are no contraindications, a woman with 1 previous transverse low-segment Caesarean section should be offered a trial of labour (TOL) with appropriate discussion of perinatal risks and benefits. The process of informed consent with appropriate documentation should be an important part of the birth plan in a woman with a previous Caesarean section (II-2B). 2. The intention of a woman undergoing a TOL after Caesarean section should be clearly stated, and documentation of the previous uterine scar should be clearly marked on the prenatal record (II-2B). 3. For a safe labour after Caesarean section, a woman should deliver in a hospital where a timely Caesarean section is possible. The woman and her health care provider must be aware of the hospital resources and the availability of obstetric, anesthetic, pediatric, and operating-room staff (II-2A). 4. Each hospital should have a written policy in place regarding the notification and (or) consultation for the physicians responsible for a possible timely Caesarean section (III-B). 5. In the case of a TOL after Caesarean, an approximate time frame of 30 minutes should be considered adequate in the set-up of an urgent laparotomy (III-C). 6. Continuous electronic monitoring of women attempting a TOL after Caesarean section is recommended (II-2A). 7. Suspected uterine rupture requires urgent attention and expedited laparotomy to attempt to decrease maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality (II-2A). 8. Oxytocin augmentation is not contraindicated in women undergoing a TOL after Caesarean section (11-2A). 9. Medical induction of labour with oxytocin may be associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture and should be used carefully after appropriate counselling (II-2B). 10. Medical induction of labour with prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) is associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture and should not be used except in rare circumstances and after appropriate counselling (II-2B). 11. Prostaglandin E1 (misoprostol) is associated with a high risk of uterine rupture and should not be used as part of a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 12. A foley catheter may be safely used to ripen the cervix in a woman planning a TOL after Caesarean section (II-2A). 13. The available data suggest that a trial of labour in women with more than 1 previous Caesarean section is likely to be successful but is associated with a higher risk of uterine rupture (II-2B). 14. Multiple gestation is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 15. Diabetes mellitus is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 16. Suspected fetal macrosomia is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 17. Women delivering within 18 to 24 months of a Caesarean section should be counselled about an increased risk of uterine rupture in labour (II-2B). 18. Postdatism is not a contraindication to TOL after Caesarean section (II-2B). 19. Every effort should be made to obtain the previous Caesarean section operative report to determine the type of uterine incision used. In situations where the scar is unknown, information concerning the circumstances of the delivery is helpful in determining the likelihood of a low transverse incision. If the likelihood of a low transverse incision is high, a TOL after Caesarean section can be offered (II-2B).

VALIDATION

These guidelines were approved by the Clinical Practice Obstetrics and Executive Committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

[Incidence and indications for cesarean section in the Obstetrics Clinic in the University Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology "Maichin Dom" in Sofia]

The incidence and the indications for Cesarean section in the Obstetric Clinic of the University Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology were analysed and compared to a study carried out 20 years ago In 2003 - 2004 there were 2700 pregnant women treated in the clinic 558 had Cesarean section (incidence 20.7%). For comparison the incidence of Cesarean section in 1985 was 6.67% (160 Cesarean sections for 2096 patients) and for 1986 the incidence was 7.63% (131 Cesarean Sections for 1865 patients. The leading indication for the both studies was "previous Cesarean section" the indication "contracted pelvis" was the second and infertility and breech presentation were on the third and forth place. There was no change in the indications for Cesqarean section in the present study and the study carried out 20 years ago. There was a relative increase of the indications 'contracted pelvis' and 'increased age in a nulliparous patiet' compared to the previous years.

Risk Factors for Bladder Injury During Cesarean Delivery

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors for bladder injury during cesarean delivery so as to inform patients and practitioners of these risks.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study of women undergoing cesarean delivery at Women and Infants Hospital between January 1995 and December 2002. Cases were women with bladder injuries at the time of cesarean delivery. Two controls per case were selected randomly. Medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data to compare cases and controls.

RESULTS

Forty-two bladder injuries were identified among 14,757 cesarean deliveries (incidence of 0.28%). Prior cesarean delivery was more prevalent among cases than controls (67% versus 32%, P < .01). The adjusted risk for bladder injury associated with prior cesarean delivery was 3.82 (95% confidence interval 1.62-8.97). Statistically significant differences (P values < or = .01) between cases and controls were found in emergent timing of delivery (31% versus 11%), labor before cesarean (83% versus 61%), attempted vaginal birth after cesarean (64% versus 22%), concurrent uterine rupture (14% versus 0%), adhesions (60% versus 10%), age (33.6 versus 29.3 years), and body mass index (29.9 versus 33.0 kg/m2). No differences were found among type of uterine incision, labor induction, chorioamnionitis, fetal position, gestational age, or maternal illnesses.

CONCLUSION

Prior cesarean delivery is a risk factor for bladder injury at the time of repeat cesarean delivery. Patients should be counseled regarding this risk, particularly in the setting of increasing rates of elective primary cesarean delivery.

Risks of induction of labour in women with a uterine scar from previous low transverse caesarean section

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies have shown that among women with uterine scars from previous caesarean section of any type, induction of labour is associated with increased risk of uterine rupture compared with spontaneous labour. We have assessed the risk of uterine rupture in a cohort of women with a previous low transverse caesarean section in whom induction and management of labour were performed according to a strict protocol.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

University Hospital.

POPULATION

All women with a singleton pregnancy and a previous low transverse caesarean section requiring induction of labour from 1/1/1992 to 12/30/2001 (n = 310) were compared with a control cohort during the same study period constituted of women with a previous low transverse caesarean section in spontaneous labour (n = 1011).

METHODS

Clinical characteristics and rate of uterine rupture of women with previous caesarean section undergoing induction of labour were compared with those of women with previous caesarean section in spontaneous labour.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Incidence of uterine rupture.

RESULTS

Uterine rupture occurred in 0.3% in the previous caesarean section--induction group versus 0.3% in the previous caesarean section--spontaneous labour group (P = 0.9). Logistic regression analysis showed no significant difference in the rate of uterine rupture between the induction and spontaneous labour group (P = 0.67) after controlling for maternal age, parity, duration of labour, gestational age at delivery and birthweight.

CONCLUSION

Among women with a previous low transverse caesarean section, induction of labour is not associated with significantly higher rates of uterine rupture compared with spontaneous labour, provided a consistent protocol with strict criteria for intervention is adopted.

Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth

BACKGROUND

When a woman has had a previous caesarean birth, there are two options for her care in a subsequent pregnancy: planned elective repeat caesarean or planned vaginal birth. While there are risks and benefits for both planned elective repeat caesarean birth and planned vaginal birth after caesarean, current sources of information are limited to non-randomised cohort studies. Studies designed in this way have significant potential for bias and consequently conclusions based on these results are limited in their reliability and should be interpreted with caution.

OBJECTIVES

To assess, using the best available evidence, the benefits and harms of a policy of planned elective repeat caesarean section with a policy of planned vaginal birth after caesarean section for women with a previous caesarean birth.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (24 June 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2004), and PubMed (1966 to 24 June 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials with reported data that compared outcomes in mothers and babies who planned a repeat elective caesarean section with outcomes in women who planned a vaginal birth, where a previous birth had been by caesarean.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

There were no randomised controlled trials identified.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned vaginal birth after caesarean section for women with a prior caesarean birth are both associated with benefits and harms. Evidence for these care practices is drawn from non-randomised studies, associated with potential bias. Any results and conclusions must therefore be interpreted with caution. Randomised controlled trials are required to provide the most reliable evidence regarding the benefits and harms of both planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth.

Maternal and neonatal morbidity after elective repeat Cesarean delivery versus a trial of labor after previous Cesarean delivery in a community teaching hospital

OBJECTIVE

To compare maternal and fetal outcomes after elective repeat Cesarean section versus a trial of labor in women after one prior uterine scar.

STUDY DESIGN

All women with a previous single low transverse Cesarean section delivered at term with no contraindications to vaginal delivery were retrospectively identified in our database from January 1995 to October 1998. Outcomes were first analyzed by comparing mother-neonate dyads delivered by elective repeat Cesarean section to those undergoing a trial of labor. Secondarily, outcomes of mother-neonatal dyads who achieved a vaginal delivery or failed a trial of labor were compared to those who had elective repeat Cesarean delivery.

RESULTS

Of 1408 deliveries, 749/927 (81%) had a successful vaginal birth after a prior Cesarean delivery. There were no differences in the rates of transfusion, infection, uterine rupture and operative injury when comparing trial of labor versus elective repeat Cesarean delivery. Neonates delivered by elective repeat Cesarean delivery were of earlier gestation and had higher rates of respiratory complications (p < 0.05). Mother-neonatal dyads with a failed trial of labor sustained the greatest risk of complications.

CONCLUSION

Overall, neonatal and maternal outcomes compared favorably among women undergoing a trial of labor versus elective repeat Cesarean delivery. The majority of morbidity was associated with a failed trial of labor. Better selection of women likely to have a successful vaginal birth after a prior Cesarean delivery would be expected to decrease the risks of trial of labor.

Sonographic imaging of cervical scars after Cesarean section

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether uterine contractions at the time of a Cesarean section have an impact on future presence and location of a cervical Cesarean scar.

METHODS

A targeted transvaginal ultrasound examination of the fetus, uterus and cervix was done in 2973 consecutive women at 14-16 weeks' gestation. The sonographer was blinded to the women's previous obstetric histories. The presence and location of a sonographic cervical hypoechogenic line, which probably represented a Cesarean scar, was recorded.

RESULTS

There were 180 women with a previous Cesarean section performed before the start of uterine contractions and 173 with a Cesarean section performed during contractions in labor. The cervical hypoechogenic line was more common in sections performed during contractions (75.7% vs. 52.7%; P < 0.001) and was more distally located from the internal os (17.9 +/- 9.4 vs. 14.6 +/- 9.1 mm; P = 0.01). A hypoechogenic line was observed in 21/2620 women without a previous Cesarean section, representing a false-positive rate of 0.8%.

CONCLUSION

Cesarean sections, especially those done during uterine contractions, are actually performed through cervical tissue. This finding is in agreement with the physiological process of cervical effacement during contractions.

Once a pregnancy, always a cesarean? Rationale and feasibility of a randomized controlled trial

Although vaginal delivery has long been assumed to be the preferred route of delivery in women who have not had a prior cesarean delivery, some have recently advocated that women be offered the option of elective, primary cesarean delivery in all pregnancies. Available outcome data, however, do not permit ready comparison of these alternate plans for delivery. Important maternal outcomes include short-term complications such as death, bleeding, infection, and damage to pelvic organs as well as long-term effects on future pregnancies, fecal and urinary incontinence, and pelvic organ prolapse. Important neonatal outcomes include asphyxic and traumatic birth injury, infection, respiratory complications, and stillbirth. To weigh the relative merits of elective primary cesarean delivery and a trial of labor, a randomized controlled trial is needed. Such a trial would be both ethical and feasible.