Factors Affecting the Tendency to Natural Delivery after Cesarean Section and its Suitable Candidate: A Review study
Subject Areas : women health
Tayyebeh Jahangir
1
,
Mansooreh Tajvedi
2
*
,
fateme mohammadi shir mahale
3
,
Nahid Dehghan Nayyeri
4
1 - PhD Student in Health Psychology, Department of Psychology, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran, jahangirtayebeh@gmail.com
2 - (Corresponding author), Department of Nursing, Karaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Karaj, Iran, mansooreh_tajvidi@yahoo.com , Tell: 09123621952
3 - Faculty of psychology and Educational ScienceDept. of General Psychology
4 - Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , nahid.nayeri@gmail.com
Keywords: Childbirth, Cesarean Delivery, Normal Delivery, TOLAC, VBAC,
Abstract :
© 2020 The Author(s). This work is published by family and health as an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Introduction: Choosing natural childbirth after cesarean section (VBAC) is a logical and wise action for many women, and if these women are chosen correctly, the risk of morbidities such as childbirth bleeding, infection, injuries caused by surgery, thromboembolism, hysterectomy and even death decreases. Research Method: This issue is for those who decide to have larger families and are therefore at risk of possible consequences from repeated cesarean sections such as hysterectomy, damage to the bladder and intestines, blood transfusion, infection and abnormal implantation of the placenta (placenta previa and placenta Akreta) are located, it should be taken into consideration. Also, people who have a successful trial of labor leading to a vaginal delivery (TOLAC) have a faster recovery period and lower costs of delivery than people who choose a second cesarean section. Findings: The risk of uterine rupture, which was the most important reason for repeated cesarean sections in the past, is usually very small and less than 1%, contrary to popular belief. Today, the acceptance of VBAC has increased due to the many benefits of natural childbirth and the risks of elective cesarean for the mother and the fetus. Conclusion: According to the stated content, it can be concluded that natural childbirth after cesarean section has improved the health of the child after birth in suitable candidates for TOLAC.
Reference:
1. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016 Feb 5;11(2):e0148343. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148343. PMID: 26849801; PMCID: PMC4743929.
2. Balachandran L, Vaswani PR, Mogotlane R. Pregnancy outcome in women with previous one cesarean section. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Feb;8(2):99-102. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/7774.4019. Epub 2014 Feb 3. PMID: 24701494; PMCID: PMC3972611.
3. Carauleanu A, Tanasa IA, Nemescu D, Haba R, Socolov D. Vaginal birth after Cesarean experience in Romania: A retrospective case-series study and online survey. Exp Ther Med. 2021 Aug; 22(2): 894. doi: 10.3892/etm.2021.10326. Epub 2021 Jun 18. PMID: 34194570; PMCID: PMC8237270.
4. Fobelets M, Beeckman K, Faron G, Daly D, Begley C, Putman K. Vaginal birth after caesarean versus elective repeat caesarean delivery after one previous caesarean section: a cost-effectiveness analysis in four European countries. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 Apr 11; 18(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12884-018-1720-6. PMID: 29642858; PMCID: PMC5896042.
5. Gregory KD, Jackson S, Korst L, Fridman M. Cesarean versus vaginal delivery: whose risks? Whose benefits? Am J Perinatol. 2012 Jan; 29(1):7-18. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1285829. Epub 2011 Aug 10. PMID: 21833896.
6. Huang X, Lei J, Tan H, Walker M, Zhou J, Wen SW. Cesarean delivery for first pregnancy and neonatal morbidity and mortality in second pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011 Oct; 158(2):204-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.05.006. PMID: 21641102.
7. Caesarean childbirth. Summary of an NIH consensus statement. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1981 May 16; 282(6276):1600-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.282.6276.1600. PMID: 6786581; PMCID: PMC1505571.
8. Doan E, Gibbons K, Tudehope D. The timing of elective caesarean deliveries and early neonatal outcomes in singleton infants born 37-41 weeks' gestation. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014 Aug; 54(4): 340-7. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12220. Epub 2014 May 19. PMID: 24836174.
9. Trojano G, Vignali M, Busacca M, et al. The timing of elective caesarean delivery at term in Lombardy: A comparison of 2010 and 2014. Ital J Gynaecol Obstet. 2016;28(2):48–51. DOI:10.14660/2385-0868-43.
10. Dumpa V, Avulakunta I, Shelton J, Yu T, Lakshminrusimha S. Induction of labor and early-onset Sepsis guidelines: impact on NICU admissions in Erie County, NY. Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2019 Dec 5; 5: 19. doi: 10.1186/s40748-019-0114-8. PMID: 31844538; PMCID: PMC6894216.
11. ACOG educational bulletin. Assessment of fetal lung maturity. Number 230, November 1996. Committee on Educational Bulletins of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1997 Feb;56(2):191-8. PMID: 9061400.
12. Lemas DJ, Mack JA, Schoch JJ, Cacho N, Plasencia E, Rhoton-Vlasak AS, Neu J, Thompson L, Francois M, Patel K, Hogan WR, Lipori GP, Gurka MJ. Postnatal pediatric systemic antibiotic episodes during the first three years of life are not associated with mode of delivery. PLoS One. 2020 Mar 4; 15(3):e0229861. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229861. PMID: 32130278; PMCID: PMC7055886.
13. Flamm BL, Newman LA, Thomas SJ, Fallon D, Yoshida MM. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: results of a 5-year multicenter collaborative study. Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Nov; 76(5 Pt 1):750-4. doi: 10.1097/00006250-199011000-00004. PMID: 2216218.
14. Durnwald C, Mercer B. Vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery: predicting success, risks of failure. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2004 Jun; 15(6):388-93. doi: 10.1080/14767050410001724290. PMID: 15280110.
15. Durnwald CP, Ehrenberg HM, Mercer BM. The impact of maternal obesity and weight gain on vaginal birth after cesarean section success. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Sep; 191(3):954-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.05.051. PMID: 15467571.
16. Bianchi C, Battini L, Aragona M, Lencioni C, Ottanelli S, Romano M, Calabrese M, Cuccuru I, De Bellis A, Mori ML, Leopardi A, Sabbatini G, Bottone P, Miccoli R, Trojano G, Salerno MG, Del Prato S, Bertolotto A; Tuscany working group on “Diabetes, Pregnancy and Exercise”. Prescribing exercise for prevention and treatment of gestational diabetes: review of suggested recommendations. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017 Apr; 33(4):254-260. doi: 10.1080/09513590.2016.1266474. Epub 2017 Jan 13. PMID: 28084847.
17. Birara M, Gebrehiwot Y. Factors associated with success of vaginal birth after one caesarean section (VBAC) at three teaching hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a case control study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013 Feb 1; 13: 31. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-31. PMID: 23374116; PMCID: PMC3575257.
18. Coleman TL, Randall H, Graves W, Lindsay M. Vaginal birth after cesarean among women with gestational diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 May; 184(6): 1104-7. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.115176. PMID: 11349170.
19. Mercer BM, Gilbert S, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, Varner MW, Moawad AH, Simhan HN, Harper M, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, Carpenter M, Peaceman A, O'Sullivan MJ, Sibai BM, Langer O, Thorp JM, Ramin SM; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Labor outcomes with increasing number of prior vaginal births after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Feb; 111(2 Pt 1):285-91. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816102b9. PMID: 18238964.
20. Kalok A, Zabil SA, Jamil MA, Lim PS, Shafiee MN, Kampan N, Shah SA, Mohamed Ismail NA. Antenatal scoring system in predicting the success of planned vaginal birth following one previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Apr; 38(3): 339-343. doi: 10.1080/01443615.2017.1355896. Epub 2017 Oct 10. PMID: 29017359.
21. Landon MB, Leindecker S, Spong CY, Hauth JC, Bloom S, Varner MW, Moawad AH, Caritis SN, Harper M, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, Carpenter M, Peaceman AM, O'Sullivan MJ, Sibai BM, Langer O, Thorp JM, Ramin SM, Mercer BM, Gabbe SG; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The MFMU Cesarean Registry: factors affecting the success of trial of labor after previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Sep; 193(3 Pt 2):1016-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.05.066. PMID: 16157104.
22. Gupta S, Jeeyaselan S, Guleria R, Gupta A. An observational study of various predictors of success of vaginal delivery following a previous cesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2014 Aug; 64(4): 260-4. doi: 10.1007/s13224-014-0519-2. Epub 2014 Mar 19. PMID: 25136171; PMCID: PMC4126941.
23. Malvasi A, Zaami S, Tinelli A, Trojano G, Montanari Vergallo G, Marinelli E. Kristeller maneuvers or fundal pressure and maternal/neonatal morbidity: obstetric and judicial literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019 Aug; 32(15):2598-2607. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2018.1441278. Epub 2018 Feb 21. PMID: 29466899.
24. Newfield E. Third-trimester pregnancy complications. Prim Care. 2012 Mar;39(1):95-113. doi: 10.1016/j.pop.2011.11.005. PMID: 22309584.
25. Rietveld AL, Teunissen PW, Kazemier BM, De Groot CJM. Effect of interpregnancy interval on the success rate of trial of labor after cesarean. J Perinatol. 2017 Nov; 37(11):1192-1196. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.117. Epub 2017 Aug 31. PMID: 29138524.
26. Bujold E, Goyet M, Marcoux S, Brassard N, Cormier B, Hamilton E, Abdous B, Sidi EAL, Kinch R, Miner L, Masse A, Fortin C, Gagné GP, Fortier A, Bastien G, Sabbah R, Guimond P, Roberge S, Gauthier RJ. The role of uterine closure in the risk of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jul; 116(1):43-50. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e41be3. PMID: 20567166.
27. Grimbizis GF, Gordts S, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Brucker S, De Angelis C, Gergolet M, Li TC, Tanos V, Brölmann H, Gianaroli L, Campo R. The ESHRE/ESGE consensus on the classification of female genital tract congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod. 2013 Aug; 28(8):2032-44. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det098. Epub 2013 Jun 14. PMID: 23771171; PMCID: PMC3712660.
28. Erez O, Dukler D, Novack L, Rozen A, Zolotnik L, Bashiri A, Koifman A, Mazor M. Trial of labor and vaginal birth after cesarean section in patients with uterine Müllerian anomalies: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Jun; 196(6): 537.e1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.01.012. PMID: 17547885.
29. Brill Y, Windrim R. Vaginal birth after Caesarean section: review of antenatal predictors of success. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2003 Apr; 25(4):275-86. doi: 10.1016/s1701-2163(16)31030-1. PMID: 12679819.
30. Jongen VH, Halfwerk MG, Brouwer WK. Vaginal delivery after previous caesarean section for failure of second stage of labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998 Oct; 105(10):1079-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb09939.x. PMID: 9800930.
31. Mone F, Harrity C, Toner B, Mcnally A, Adams B, Currie A. Predicting why women have elective repeat cesarean deliveries and predictors of successful vaginal birth after cesarean. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014 Jul; 126(1): 67-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.12.013. Epub 2014 Mar 21. PMID: 24731437.
32. Al Bizri A, Boghossian NS, Nassar A, Nakad P, Jaber D, Chahine R, Fallakha G, Makhoul G, Yunis K. Timing of term elective cesarean section and adverse neonatal outcomes: A multi-center retrospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2021 Apr 5; 16(4): e0249557. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249557. PMID: 33819296; PMCID: PMC8021177.
33. Stylianou-Riga P, Boutsikou T, Kouis P, Kinni P, Krokou M, Ioannou A, Siahanidou T, Iliodromiti Z, Papadouri T, Yiallouros PK, Iacovidou N. Maternal and neonatal risk factors for neonatal respiratory distress syndrome in term neonates in Cyprus: a prospective case-control study. Ital J Pediatr. 2021 Jun 3; 47(1): 129. doi: 10.1186/s13052-021-01086-5. PMID: 34082803; PMCID: PMC8176707.
34. Ayachi A, Derouich S, Morjene I, Mkaouer L, Mnaser D, Mourali M. Facteurs prédictifs de l’issue de l’accouchement sur utérus unicicatriciel, expérience du centre de Maternité de Bizerte [Predictors of birth outcomes related to women with a previous caesarean section: experience of a Motherhood Center, Bizerte]. Pan Afr Med J. 2016 Oct 10; 25: 76. French. doi: 10.11604/pamj.2016.25.76.9164. PMID: 28292039; PMCID: PMC5324170.
35. Caughey AB, Shipp TD, Repke JT, Zelop CM, Cohen A, Lieberman E. Rate of uterine rupture during a trial of labor in women with one or two prior cesarean deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Oct; 181(4): 872-6. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70317-0. PMID: 10521745.
36. Quiñones JN, Stamilio DM, Paré E, Peipert JF, Stevens E, Macones GA. The effect of prematurity on vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: success and maternal morbidity. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Mar; 105(3): 519-24. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000153493.15922.85. PMID: 15738018.
37. Hoskins IA, Gomez JL. Correlation between maximum cervical dilatation at cesarean delivery and subsequent vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Apr; 89(4):591-3. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00046-x. PMID: 9083318.
38. Metz TD, Allshouse AA, Faucett AM, Grobman WA. Validation of a vaginal birth after cesarean delivery prediction model in women with two prior cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Apr; 125(4): 948-952. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000744. PMID: 25751218; PMCID: PMC4372471.
39. Metz TD, Stoddard GJ, Henry E, Jackson M, Holmgren C, Esplin S. Simple, validated vaginal birth after cesarean delivery prediction model for use at the time of admission. Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Sep; 122(3): 571-8. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31829f8ced. PMID: 23921867; PMCID: PMC5269128.
40. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, Varner MW, Moawad AH, Caritis SN, Harper M, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, Carpenter M, O'Sullivan MJ, Sibai BM, Langer O, Thorp JM, Ramin SM, Mercer BM; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU). Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Apr; 109(4): 806-12. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000259312.36053.02. PMID: 17400840.
41. Miller ES, Sakowicz A, Donelan EA, Grobman WA. Does midtrimester cervical length aid in predicting vaginal birth after cesarean? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jun;212(6):791.e1-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.01.025. Epub 2015 Feb 25. PMID: 25726519.
42. Nicholas SS, Orzechowski KM, Berghella V, Baxter JK. Second Trimester Cervical Length and Its Association with Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Delivery. Am J Perinatol. 2016 Jan; 33(1): 20-3. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1554796. Epub 2015 Jun 17. PMID: 26084747.
43. Kok N, Wiersma IC, Opmeer BC, de Graaf IM, Mol BW, Pajkrt E. Sonographic measurement of lower uterine segment thickness to predict uterine rupture during a trial of labor in women with previous Cesarean section: a meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Aug; 42(2): 132-9. doi: 10.1002/uog.12479. PMID: 23576473.
44. Martins WP, Barra DA, Gallarreta FM, Nastri CO, Filho FM. Lower uterine segment thickness measurement in pregnant women with previous Cesarean section: reliability analysis using two- and three-dimensional transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Mar; 33(3): 301-6. doi: 10.1002/uog.6224. PMID: 19148891.
45. Uharček P, Brešťanský A, Ravinger J, Máňová A, Zajacová M. Sonographic assessment of lower uterine segment thickness at term in women with previous cesarean delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015 Sep; 292(3): 609-12. doi: 10.1007/s00404-015-3687-0. Epub 2015 Mar 27. PMID: 25814295.
46. Fiocchi F, Petrella E, Nocetti L, Currà S, Ligabue G, Costi T, Torricelli P, Facchinetti F. Transvaginal ultrasound assessment of uterine scar after previous caesarean section: comparison with 3T-magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging. Radiol Med. 2015 Feb; 120(2): 228-38. doi: 10.1007/s11547-014-0431-y. Epub 2014 Aug 7. PMID: 25100304.
47. Fiocchi F, Nocetti L, Siopis E, Currà S, Costi T, Ligabue G, Torricelli P. In vivo 3 T MR Diffusion tensor imaging for detection of the fibre architecture of the human uterus: a feasibility and quantitative study. Br J Radiol. 2012 Nov; 85(1019): e1009-17. doi: 10.1259/bjr/76693739. Epub 2012 Jun 27. PMID: 22744322; PMCID: PMC3500798.
48. Estan J, Hope P. Unilateral neonatal cerebral infarction in full term infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1997 Mar; 76(2): F88-93. doi: 10.1136/fn.76.2.f88. PMID: 9135286; PMCID: PMC1720626.
49. Alfirevic Z, Devane D, Gyte GM, Cuthbert A. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 3; 2(2):CD006066. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006066.pub3. PMID: 28157275; PMCID: PMC6464257.
50. Altaf S, Oppenheimer C, Shaw R, Waugh J, Dixon-Woods M. Practices and views on fetal heart monitoring: a structured observation and interview study. BJOG. 2006 Apr; 113(4): 409-18. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00884.x. PMID: 16553652.
51. Hindley C, Hinsliff SW, Thomson AM. English midwives' views and experiences of intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring in women at low obstetric risk: conflicts and compromises. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2006 Sep-Oct; 51(5): 354-360. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2006.02.008. PMID: 16945783.
52. Jacquemyn Y, Ahankour F, Martens G. Flemish obstetricians' personal preference regarding mode of delivery and attitude towards caesarean section on demand. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003 Dec 10; 111(2): 164-6. doi: 10.1016/s0301-2115(03)00214-8. PMID: 14597245.
53. Quinlivan JA, Petersen RW, Nichols CN. Patient preference the leading indication for elective Caesarean section in public patients--results of a 2-year prospective audit in a teaching hospital. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999 May; 39(2): 207-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1999.tb03375.x. PMID: 10755782.
54. Cheng YW, Eden KB, Marshall N, Pereira L, Caughey AB, Guise JM. Delivery after prior cesarean: maternal morbidity and mortality. Clin Perinatol. 2011 Jun; 38(2): 297-309. doi: 10.1016/j.clp.2011.03.012. PMID: 21645797; PMCID: PMC3428794.
55. Villar J, Carroli G, Zavaleta N, Donner A, Wojdyla D, Faundes A, Velazco A, Bataglia V, Langer A, Narváez A, Valladares E, Shah A, Campodónico L, Romero M, Reynoso S, de Pádua KS, Giordano D, Kublickas M, Acosta A; World Health Organization 2005 Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health Research Group. Maternal and neonatal individual risks and benefits associated with caesarean delivery: multicentre prospective study. BMJ. 2007 Nov 17; 335(7628): 1025. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39363.706956.55. Epub 2007 Oct 30. PMID: 17977819; PMCID: PMC2078636.
56. Guise JM, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA, Marshall N, Fu RR, Janik R, Nygren P, Walker M, McDonagh M. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2010 Mar; (191):1-397. PMID: 20629481; PMCID: PMC4781304.
57. Morr AK, Malah N, Messer AM, Etter A, Mueller M, Raio L, Surbek D. Obstetrician involvement in planned midwife-led births: a cohort study in an obstetric department of a University Hospital in Switzerland. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Oct 27; 21(1): 728. doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-04209-2. PMID: 34706693; PMCID: PMC8549258.
58. Hanley GE, Janssen PA, Greyson D. Regional variation in the cesarean delivery and assisted vaginal delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jun; 115(6): 1201-1208. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181dd918c. PMID: 20502291.
59. Frass KA, Al Harazi AH. Outcome of vaginal birth after caesarean section in women with one previous section and spontaneous onset of labour. East Mediterr Health J. 2011 Aug; 17(8): 646-50. PMID: 21977566.
60. Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C. An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Sep; 62(9):944-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.012. Epub 2009 Feb 20. PMID: 19230612.