ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to define the variables associated with vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) and to develop a scoring system for the prediction of successful VBAC. We searched our computerized database for parturients with a history of one low-transverse cesarean section (CS) who were delivered during the year 2000. Variables were categorized according to the time period in which they were obtained: (1) first prenatal visit, (2) at the onset of labor, and (3) during labor. Univariate and multiple stepwise logistic regression models were fitted to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Of the 475 parturients with a history of one previous CS, 136 underwent elective CS and 339 underwent a trial of VBAC, of whom 82% were successful. Of the variables that can be obtained at the onset of labor, five were significantly associated with successful VBAC: abnormal presentation as the indication for the primary CS (OR, 7.4; 95% CI 2.8 to 19.2), a previous VBAC (OR, 7.2; 95% CI, 2.1 to 24.8), cervical dilation (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.9), gestational age ≤ 41 weeks (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 7.1), and lower gestational age at the primary CS (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.4). In the proposed VBAC score, each of the four most significant variables was assigned a score ranging between 0 and 3 based on the probability for VBAC. A score ≤ 2 was associated with a success rate of 42%, a score between 3 and 6 was associated with a rate of 81%, and a score between 7 and 10 was associated with a 98% successful VBAC rate (p < 0001). The proposed VBAC score may help obstetricians when counseling their patients regarding the individual likelihood of a successful VBAC.
KEYWORDS
Cesarean delivery - VBAC - scoring system
REFERENCES
-
1
Rosen M G, Dickinson J C, Westhoff C L.
Vaginal birth after cesarean: a meta-analysis of morbidity and mortality.
Obstet Gynecol.
1991;
77
465-470
-
2 Flamm B L. Vaginal birth after cesarean section. In: Flamm BL, Quilligan EJ Cesarean Section: Guidelines for Appropriate Utilization. New York; Springer-Verlag 1995: 51-64
-
3
Flamm B L, Goings J R, Liu Y, Wolde-Tsadik G.
Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus a trial of labor: a prospective multicenter study.
Obstet Gynecol.
1994;
83
927-932
-
4
Mozurkewich E L, Hutton E K.
Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999.
Am J Obstet Gynecol.
2000;
183
1187-1197
-
5
Lyndon-Rochele M, Holt V L, Easterling T R, Martin D P.
Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with prior cesarean delivery.
N Engl J Med.
2001;
345
3-8
-
6
McMahon M J, Luther E R, Bowes W A, Olshan A F.
Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section.
N Engl J Med.
1996;
335
689-695
-
7
Hibbard J U, Ismail M A, Wang Y, Te C, Karrison T.
Failed vaginal birth after a cesarean section: how risky is it? 1. Maternal morbidity.
Am J Obstet Gynecol.
2001;
184
1365-1371
-
8
Hamilton B E, Martin J A, Sutton P D.
Births: Preliminary data for 2002.
Natl Vital Stat Rep.
2003;
51
1-20
-
9
Menacker F, Curtin S C.
Trends in cesarean birth and vaginal birth after previous cesarean, 1991-1999.
Natl Vital Stat Rep.
2001;
49
1-16
-
10
Troyer L R, Parisi V M.
Obstetric parameters affecting success in a trial of labor: designation of a scoring system.
Am J Obstet Gynecol.
1992;
167
1099-1104
-
11
Flamm B L, Geiger A M.
Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: an admission scoring system.
Obstet Gynecol.
1997;
90
907-910
Ron GonenM.D.
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maternal-Fetal Medicine
Bnai Zion Medical Center, 47 Golomb Street
Haifa, Israel