Neonatal outcome after trial of labor compared with elective repeat cesarean section

被引:21
|
作者
Fisler, RE
Cohen, A
Ringer, SA
Lieberman, E
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Dept Obstet Gynecol & Reprod Biol, Brigham & Womens Hosp, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Harvard Univ, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Sch Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Harvard Univ, Sch Med, Joint Program Neonatol, Boston, MA 02115 USA
来源
BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE | 2003年 / 30卷 / 02期
关键词
D O I
10.1046/j.1523-536X.2003.00225.x
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background: Trial of labor after cesarean section has been an important strategy for lowering the rate of cesarean delivery in the United States, but concerns regarding its safety remain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of newborns delivered by elective repeat cesarean section compared to delivery following a trial of labor after cesarean. Methods: All low-risk mothers with 1 or 2 previous cesareans and no prior vaginal deliveries, who delivered at our institution from December 1994 through July 1995, were identified. Neonatal outcomes were compared between 136 women who delivered by elective repeat cesarean section and 313 women who delivered after a trial of labor. To investigate reasons for differences in outcome between these groups, neonatal outcomes within the trial of labor group were then compared between those mothers who had received epidural analgesia (n = 230) and those who did not (n = 83). Results: Infants delivered after a trial of labor had increased rates of sepsis evaluation (23.3% vs 12.5%, p = 0.008); antibiotic treatment (11.5% vs 4.4%, p = 0.02); intubation to evaluate for the presence of meconium below the cords (11.5% vs 1.5%, p < 0.001); and mild bruising (8.0% vs 1.5%, p = 0.008). Within the trial of labor group, infants of mothers who received epidural analgesia were more likely to have received diagnostic tests and therapeutic interventions including sepsis evaluation (29.6% vs 6.0%, p = 0.001) and antibiotic treatment (13.9% vs 4.8%, p = 0.03) than within the no-epidural analgesia group. Conclusions: Infants born to mothers after a trial of labor are twice as likely to undergo diagnostic tests and therapeutic interventions than infants born after an elective repeat cesarean section, but the increase occurred only in the subgroup of infants whose mothers received epidural analgesia for pain relief during labor. The higher rate of intervention could relate to the well-documented increase in intrapartum fever that occurs with epidural use.
引用
收藏
页码:83 / 88
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Neonatal morbidity after elective repeat cesarean section and trial of labor
    Hook, B
    Kiwi, R
    Amini, SB
    Fanaroff, A
    Hack, M
    PEDIATRICS, 1997, 100 (03) : 348 - 353
  • [2] Morbidity of Repeat Cesarean Delivery after a Trial of Labor as Compared with Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery
    Markovic, Emily S.
    Fox, Nathan S.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2024, 41 : e2582 - e2586
  • [3] Neonatal outcome after trial of labor or elective cesarean section in relation to the indication for the previous cesarean delivery
    Fagerberg, Marie C.
    Marsal, Karel
    Kallen, Karin
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2013, 92 (10) : 1151 - 1158
  • [4] Neonatal outcomes of trial of labor after cesarean delivery compared with elective cesarean
    Kawakita, Tetsuya
    Downs, Sarah G.
    Ghofranian, Atoosa
    Mokhtari, Neggin
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2020, 222 (01) : S380 - S380
  • [5] Maternal Outcomes of Trial of Labor After Cesarean Delivery Compared With Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery
    Gold, Stacey L.
    Downs, Sarah
    Kawakita, Tetsuya
    Ghofranian, Atoosa
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2020, 135 : 173S - 173S
  • [6] TRIAL OF LABOR VS ELECTIVE REPEAT CESAREAN-SECTION
    ROBERTS, RG
    WALL, EM
    HESS, GH
    MOY, JG
    BOWER, HPH
    BELL, HS
    AMERICAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 1995, 52 (06) : 1763 - 1765
  • [7] Trial of labor compared with an elective second cesarean section - Reply
    McMahon, MJ
    Luther, ER
    Bowes, WA
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1997, 336 (09): : 659 - 659
  • [8] Elective repeat cesarean section (ERCD) at term for all: is fear of trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) justified?
    Cohen, Yael
    Stevei, Tamar
    Farkash, Rivka
    Samueloff, Arnon
    Grisaru-Granovsky, Sorina
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2016, 214 (01) : S433 - S434
  • [9] Elective repeat cesarean delivery compared with trial of labor after a prior cesarean delivery: a propensity score analysis
    Kok, N.
    Ruiter, L.
    Lindeboom, R.
    de Groot, C.
    Pajkrt, E.
    Mol, B. W.
    Kazemier, B. M.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2015, 195 : 214 - 218
  • [10] Trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section for the women with a previous cesarean section: A decision analysis
    Chuang, JH
    Jenders, RA
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 1999, : 226 - 230