Obstetric outcomes associated with induction of labour after caesarean section

Retrospective evaluation of labor induction with scar uterus at the university hospital of Rennes

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was a retrospective evaluation of labor induction in women with one previous cesarean section. The primary outcome was the mode of delivery. We also studied the severe maternal and neonatal morbidity and identify some prediction factors of vaginal delivery after labor induction after one previous cesarean section.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective observational monocentric study performed over the period from January 1st, 2016 to April 30th, 2020 at the university hospital of Rennes. Were included women with scar uterus because of one previous cesarean section with a viable singleton fetus in cephalic presentation and an induction of labor for medical reason, at term. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze prediction of vaginal delivery after labor induction after one previous cesarean section. We also studied maternal (included uterine rupture, loss of blood, obstetrical injury of anus sphincter) and neonatal (APGAR score, arterial umbilical pH after 1 minute of life and eventual admission to neonatal unit) morbidity. We used a stepwise multivariate logistic regression model to select variables for multivariate analysis. The model with the lowest Akaike Index Criteria was chosen.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 353 women with scar uterus: 121 women were induced by balloon catheter, 57 by osmotic cervical dilatators, 91 by oxytocin alone, 84 by amniotomy. Vaginal delivery rate was 47,9%. There was 45% of vaginal delivery in the group with Bishop < 6 before induction of labor versus 62% in the group with Bishop ≥ 6. There was no statistically significative difference in neonatal and maternal severe morbidities between vaginal delivery and cesarean section: 4,5% of severe maternal morbidities (n = 16). Among their, we highlighted 7 uterine ruptures (3,8%). We observed also 3% of postpartum severe hemorrhage in vaginal delivery group (n = 5) against 1,6% in cesarian section group (n = 3) with no statistical significant difference (p = 0,632). Regarding to the obstetric perineal tears and lacerations we noticed 1,2% of OASIS 3 (n = 2) and 0,6% of OASIS 4 (n = 1). Severe neonatal morbidities were comparable by mode of delivery without significant difference: APGAR score at 5 min was similar (p = 1), as well as arterial umbilical pH after 1 min. (p = 0.719) and admissions to a neonatal unit (p = 1). Two variables were statistically associated with vaginal delivery after labor induction in women with scar uterus: Bishop score ≥ 6 (OR = 0,44; 95%CI: 0,25-0,81) and/or previous vaginal delivery after cesarean section (OR = 0,17; 95%CI: 0,08-0,35).

CONCLUSION

With 47,9% of vaginal delivery after labor induction in women with scar uterus, only 3.8% (n = 7/353) of uterine ruptures, less than 1% APGAR < 7 at 5 min (n = 3/353), induction on scar uterus should be consider in obstetrical practice. Bishop score ≥ 6 and/or previous vaginal delivery after cesarean section are associated to vaginal delivery after labor induction.

Predictors of maternal satisfaction with labor induction: A prospective observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To identify independent predictors of maternal satisfaction with labor induction.

METHOD

In this prospective observational cohort study, 769 women prior to their labor induction had sleep and psychological well-being assessed using Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scales. Women were asked about the adequacy of labor induction information provided and their involvement and time pressure felt in the decision-making for their labor induction. Maternal characteristics, induction and intrapartum care measures, and labor and neonatal outcomes were also assessed. Prior to discharge, women rated their satisfaction with their birth experience.

RESULTS

A total of 34 variables were considered for bivariate analysis, with 15 found to have P < 0.05. Following adjusted analysis, 10 independent predictors of maternal satisfaction were identified: maternal education, previous cesarean delivery, maternal involvement, information provided, and decision-making time pressure regarding labor induction, amniotomy, induction to delivery interval, mode of delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and neonatal admission. Maternal satisfaction was not associated with sleep, depression, anxiety, or stress.

CONCLUSION

The identification of independent predictors of maternal satisfaction allows for patient selection, targeting of specific preinduction and intrapartum care, and focus on induction methods that can reduce induction to delivery interval, cesarean birth, and delivery blood loss to maximize women's satisfaction with labor induction.

Foley catheter compared with controlled release dinoprostone vaginal insert for labor induction after one previous cesarean delivery: A randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare Foley catheter and controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert on induction-to-delivery interval and maternal satisfaction in women with one previous cesarean delivery.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the University Malaya Medical Center, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, from December 12, 2018, to May 28, 2019. A total of 78 term women scheduled for labor induction with one previous cesarean delivery who had ripe cervixes, singleton gestation, cephalic presentation, intact membranes, and reassuring cardiotocogram were randomized to Foley catheter or dinoprostone insert. The primary outcome was induction-to-delivery interval (in hours) and the secondary outcomes included maternal satisfaction on birth experience (assessed by 100-mm visual analog scale).

RESULTS

Induction-to-delivery intervals were as follows: median 33.5 h (interquartile range [IQR], 26.1-36.2 h) versus 23.5 h (IQR, 12.7-34.5 h) (P = 0.004), and maternal satisfaction on birth process 100-mm visual analog scale was 80 mm (IQR, 64-88 mm) versus 82 mm (IQR, 67-88 mm) (P = 0.919) for the Foley and controlled-release dinoprostone arms, respectively. Cesarean delivery rates were 23 of 39 (59%) versus 20 of 39 (51%) (relative risk, 1.15 [95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.72]) (P = 0.496) and trial device insertion to removal time mean ± standard deviation was 20.1 ± 7.1 h versus 14.2 ± 7.3 h (P = 0.001) for Foley versus controlled-release dinoprostone, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In term women after one previous cesarean delivery with unripe cervixes, controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert compared with Foley catheter shortens the induction-to-delivery interval but maternal satisfaction was not significantly increased.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered with ISRCTN on November 30, 2018, with trial identification number: ISRCTN16957529 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN16957529). The first participant was recruited on December 12, 2018.

Planned mode of birth after previous cesarean section: A structured review of the evidence on the associated outcomes for women and their children in high-income setting

In many high-income settings policy consensus supports giving pregnant women who have had a previous cesarean section a choice between planning an elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) or planning a vaginal birth after previous cesarean (VBAC), provided they have no contraindications to VBAC. To help women make an informed decision regarding this choice, clinical guidelines advise women should be counseled on the associated risks and benefits. The most recent and comprehensive review of the associated risks and benefits of planned VBAC compared to ERCS in high-income settings was published in 2010 by the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). This paper describes a structured review of the evidence in high-income settings that has been published since the AHRQ review and the literature in high-income settings that has been published since 1980 on outcomes not included in the AHRQ review. Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) were searched for relevant studies meeting pre-specified eligible criteria, supplemented by searching of reference lists. Forty-seven studies were identified as meeting the eligibility criteria and included in the structured review. The review suggests that while planned VBAC compared to ERCS is associated with an increased risk of various serious birth-related complications for both the mother and her baby, the absolute risk of these complications is small for either birth approach. The review also found some evidence that planned VBAC compared to ERCS is associated with benefits such as a shorter length of hospital stay and a higher likelihood of breastfeeding. The limited evidence available also suggests that planned mode of birth after previous cesarean section is not associated with the child's subsequent risk of experiencing adverse neurodevelopmental or health problems in childhood. This information can be used to manage and counsel women with previous cesarean section about their subsequent birth choices. Collectively, the evidence supports existing consensus that there are risks and benefits associated with both planned VBAC and ERCS, and therefore women without contraindications to VBAC should be given an informed choice about planned mode of birth after previous cesarean section. However, further studies into the longer-term effects of planned mode of birth after previous cesarean section are needed along with more research to address the other key limitations and gaps that have been highlighted with the existing evidence.

Robson's Ten Group Classification System to Evaluate Cesarean Section Rates in Honduras: The Relevance of Labor Induction

OBJECTIVE

 To use the Robson Ten Group Classification (RTGC) to analyze cesarean section (CS) rates in a Honduran maternity hospital, with focus in groups that consider induction of labor.

METHODS

 Cross-sectional study. Women admitted for childbirth (August 2017 to October 2018) were classified according to the RTGC. The CS rate for each group and the contribution to the overall CS rate was calculated, with further analyses of the induction of labor among term primiparous (group 2a), term multiparous (group 4a), and cases with one previous CS (group 5.1).

RESULTS

 A total of 4,356 women were considered, with an overall CS rate of 26.1%. Group 3 was the largest group, with 38.6% (1,682/4,356) of the cases, followed by Group 1, with 30.8% (1,342/4,356), and Group 5, with 10.3% (450/4,356). Considering the contribution to overall CS rates per group, Group 5 contributed with 30.4% (345/1,136) of the CSs and within this group, 286/345 (82.9%) had 1 previous CS, with a CS rate > 70%. Groups 1 and 3, with 26.6% (291/1,136) and 13.5% (153/1,136), respectively, were the second and third larger contributors to the CS rate. Groups 2a and 4a had high induction success, with low CS rates (18.4 and 16.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

 The RTGC is a useful tool to assess CS rates in different healthcare facilities. Groups 5, 1, and 3 were the main contributors to the CS rate, and groups 2 and 4 showed the impact and importance of induction of labor. These findings may support future interventions to reduce unnecessary CS, especially among primiparous and in women with previous CS.

Mechanical Methods for the Induction of Labour After Previous Caesarean Section – An Updated, Evidence-based Review

There are currently no up-to-date evidence-based recommendations on the preferred method to induce labour after previous Caesarean section, especially for patients with unripe cervix, as randomised controlled studies are lacking. Intravenous oxytocin and misoprostol are contraindicated in these women because of the high risk of uterine rupture. In women with ripe cervix (Bishop Score > 6), intravenous administration of oxytocin is an effective procedure with comparable rates of uterine rupture to those with spontaneous onset of labour. Vaginal prostaglandin E ₂ (PGE ₂ ) and mechanical methods (balloon catheters, hygroscopic cervical dilators) are effective methods to induce labour in pregnant women with unripe cervix and previous Caesarean section. According to current guidelines, the administration of PGE ₂ is associated with a higher rate of uterine rupture compared to balloon catheters. Balloon catheters are therefore a suitable alternative to PGE ₂ to induce labour after previous Caesarean section, even though this is an off-label use. In addition to two meta-analyses published in 2016, 12 mostly retrospective cohort/observational studies with low to moderate levels of evidence have been published on mechanical methods of cervical ripening after previous Caesarean section. But because of the significant heterogeneity of the studies, substantial differences in study design, and insufficient numbers of pregnant women included in the studies, it is not possible to make any evidence-based recommendations based on these studies. According to a recent meta-analysis, the average rate using balloon catheters is approximately 53% and the average rate after spontaneous onset of labour is 72%. The uterine rupture rate was 0.2–0.9% for vaginal PGE ₂ and 0.56–0.94% for balloon catheters and is therefore comparable to the uterine rupture rate associated with spontaneous onset of labour. According to the product informations, hygroscopic cervical dilators (Dilapan-S) are currently the only method which is not contraindicated for cervical ripening/induction of labour in women with previous Caesarean section, although data are insufficient. Well-designed, randomised, controlled studies with sufficient case numbers comparing balloon catheters and hygroscopic cervical dilators with mechanical methods and vaginal prostaglandin E ₂ /oral misoprostol are therefore necessary to allow proper decision-making.

Induction of labour in patients with prior caesarean births or uterine surgery

The current evidence favours trial of labour after one caesarean in the absence of any other contraindications, recognizing that risks with both trial of labour after caesarean (TOLAC) and elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS) birth are relatively uncommon. When the need for induction of labour (IOL) following a previous caesarean arises, shared decision-making should be based on the current available evidence. This approach, however, needs to be tailored, taking into account the individual's history, initial examination and response to the ongoing process of induction to optimize the maternal and foetal outcomes. This paper aims to review the evidence and provide guidance on decision making surrounding labour induction in a pregnancy following a prior caesarean or uterine surgery.

Balloon catheter vs oxytocin alone for induction of labor in women with one previous cesarean section and an unfavorable cervix: a multicenter, retrospective study

PURPOSE

To compare the rate of vaginal birth between double-balloon catheter and oxytocin alone for induction of labor in women with one previous cesarean section and an unfavorable cervix.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective and observational study was conducted from 2013 to 2017, at the Saint-Etienne University Hospital where women received induction with a double-balloon catheter for 12 h and at the Grenoble Alpes University Hospital where women received induction with a low-dose oxytocin infusion. Primary outcome was the rate of vaginal birth.

RESULTS

Out of 1920 women eligible for attempting a vaginal birth after one previous cesarean section, 501 had a labor induction. Among women with an unfavorable cervix, 160 received a double-balloon catheter in Saint Etienne and 152 received oxytocin alone in Grenoble. The vaginal birth rate was higher in the double-balloon catheter group (61% versus 47% in the oxytocin group). An induction of labor with oxytocin alone reduced chances of vaginal birth (aOR 0.38 CI-95% [0.22-0.66]) compared to cervical ripening with double-balloon catheter. The perinatal morbidity was similar in the two groups. There was, however, 3.9% uterine rupture in the oxytocin group versus 0.6% in the double-balloon group (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

For induction of labor in women with one previous cesarean section and with unfavorable cervix, cervical ripening with a double-balloon catheter increases the rate of vaginal birth without increased risk of uterine rupture.

Cervical ripening after cesarean section: a prospective dual center study comparing a mechanical osmotic dilator vs. prostaglandin E2

OBJECTIVES

Worldwide, the overall cesarean section is rising. Trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) is an overall safe option with an immediate impact on neonatal and maternal short- and long-term health. Since the use of prostaglandins in cervical ripening is associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture, mechanical methods as balloon catheters or osmotic dilators have been suggested for cervical ripening prior to induction of labour. Here we are analyzing and comparing the VBAC rate, as well as maternal and fetal outcome in cervical ripening prior to TOLAC.

METHODS

This prospective dual center study analyses maternal and neonatal outcomes of TOLAC in women with an unfavorable cervix requiring cervical ripening agent. The prospective application of an osmotic dilator (Dilapan-S, n=104) was analysed in comparison to the retrospective application of off-label dinoprostone (n=102).

RESULTS

The overall fetal and neonatal outcome revealed no significant differences in both groups. Patients receiving cervical ripening with the osmotic dilator delivered vaginally/by ventouse in 52% of cases, compared to 53% when using dinoprostone (p=0.603). The interval between application to onset of labor was significantly higher in the osmotic dilator group (37.9 vs.20.7 h, p=<0.001). However, time from onset of labor to delivery was similar in both groups (7.93 vs. 7.44 h, p=0.758). There was one case of uterine rupture in the dinoprostone group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data shows that the application of the osmotic dilator leads to similar outcomes in VBAC rate and time from onset of labor to delivery as well as safety in both groups compared to off-label use dinoprostone. Cervical ripening using the mechanical dilator is a viable and effective option, without the risk of uterine hyperstimulation.

Management of prolonged first stage of labour in a low-resource setting: lessons learnt from rural Malawi

Background

Caesarean sections without medical indication cause substantial maternal and perinatal ill-health, particularly in low-income countries where surgery is often less safe. In presence of adequate labour monitoring and by appropriate use of evidence-based interventions for prolonged first stage of labour, unnecessary caesarean sections can be avoided. We aim to describe the incidence of prolonged first stage of labour and the use of amniotomy and augmentation with oxytocin in a low-resource setting in Malawi.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of medical records and partographs of all women who gave birth in 2015 and 2016 in a rural mission hospital in Malawi. Primary outcomes were incidence of prolonged first stage of labour based on partograph tracings, caesarean section indications and utilization of amniotomy and oxytocin augmentation.

Results

Out of 3246 women who gave birth in the study period, 178 (5.2%) crossed the action line in the first stage of labour, of whom 21 (11.8%) received oxytocin to augment labour. In total, 645 women gave birth by caesarean section, of whom 241 (37.4%) with an indication ‘prolonged first stage of labour’. Only 113 (46.9%) of them crossed the action line and in 71/241 (29.5%) membranes were still intact at the start of caesarean section. Excluding the 60 women with prior caesarean sections, 14/181 (7.7%) received oxytocin prior to caesarean section for augmentation of labour.

Conclusion

The diagnosis prolonged first stage of labour was often made without being evident from labour tracings and two basic obstetric interventions to prevent caesarean section, amniotomy and labour augmentation with oxytocin, were underused.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-021-03856-9.

Oxytocin use in trial of labor after cesarean and its relationship with risk of uterine rupture in women with one previous cesarean section: a meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

Trial of labor after a previous cesarean delivery (TOLAC) has reduced the rate of cesarean sections (CS). Nevertheless, the widespread use of TOLAC has been limited by an increase in adverse outcomes, the most serious one being the risk of symptomatic uterine rupture, which is possibly associated with oxytocin. In this meta-analysis, we explored the risk association between oxytocin use and uterine rupture in TOLAC.

METHODS

Multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were searched for cross-sectional studies reporting on TOLAC, oxytocin and uterine rupture, which were published between January 1986 and October 2019. The bias-corrected Hedge's g was calculated as the effect size using the random-effects model. A two-sample Z test was used to compare the differences in synthetic rates between groups. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the risk of bias. Quality of the evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) certainty ratings system.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies, which included 48,457 women who underwent TOLAC, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of vaginal birth after a cesarean section (VBAC) and the rate of uterine rupture in spontaneous labor were 74.3 and 0.7%, respectively. In addition, the pooled rate of VBAC and the rate of uterine rupture in the induction labor group was 60.7 and 2.2%, respectively. The women who had spontaneous labor had a significantly higher rate of VBAC (p = 0.001) and a lower rate of uterine rupture (p = 0.0003) compared to induced labor. The pooled rates of uterine rupture in women using oxytocin and women not using oxytocin in TOLAC were 1.4% and 0.5%, respectively, and the difference was significant (p = 0.0002). Also, the synthetic rate of uterine rupture in oxytocin augmentation among women with spontaneous labor and women who had a successful induction of labor were 1.7% and 2.2%, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.443).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with induced labor had a higher risk of uterine rupture compared to women with spontaneous labor following TOLAC. Oxytocin use may increase this risk, which could be influenced by the process of induction or individual cervix condition. Consequently, simplified and standardized intrapartum management, precise protocol, and cautious monitoring of oxytocin use in TOLAC are necessary.

Labor progression of women attempting vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery with or without epidural analgesia

PURPOSE

Normal labor curves have not been assessed for women undergoing a trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC). This study examined labor patterns during TOLAC in relation to epidural analgesia use.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of deliveries of women undergoing TOLAC at a single, academic, tertiary medical center. Length of first, second and third stages of labor was compared between 424 women undergoing TOLAC in the current labor with no previous vaginal delivery (VD) and 357 women with at least one previous VD and current TOLAC.

RESULTS

Women in the TOLAC only group had significantly longer labors compared to women in the previous VD and TOLAC group. In both groups, women who underwent epidural analgesia had longer first and second stages of labor. In the TOLAC only group, more women who had epidural analgesia tended to deliver vaginally as compared to those who did not (P = 0.09). For women who delivered vaginally, the 95th percentile for the second stage duration with epidural was 3.40 h in the TOLAC only group and 2.3 h in the previous VD and TOLAC group. The 95th percentile for the second stage duration without epidural was 1.4 h in the TOLAC only group and 0.9 h in the previous VD and TOLAC group.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative intervention (instrumental delivery/cesarean delivery (CD)) might be considered for women attempting TOLAC after a 2-h duration of second stage without epidural and 3-h duration with epidural, with an hour less for women who also had previous VD.