Association of induction of labor and uterine rupture in women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean: a survival analysis

被引:26
|
作者
Harper, Lorie M. [1 ]
Cahill, Alison G. [1 ]
Boslaugh, Sarah [1 ]
Odibo, Anthony O. [1 ]
Stamilio, David M. [1 ]
Roehl, Kimberly A. [1 ]
Macones, George A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Washington Univ, Sch Med, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, St Louis, MO 63110 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
induction of labor; survival analysis; trial of labor after cesarean; uterine rupture; RISK; PROGRESSION; DELIVERY; OUTCOMES; SECTION; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2011.09.022
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: We sought to estimate the risk of uterine rupture associated with labor induction in women attempting trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) accounting for length of labor. STUDY DESIGN: This was a nested case-control study of women attempting TOLAC within a multicenter retrospective cohort study of women with a prior cesarean. Time-to-event analyses were performed with time zero defined as the first cervical exam of 4 cm. Subjects experienced the event (uterine rupture) or were censored (delivered). RESULTS: In all, 111 cases of uterine rupture were compared to 607 controls. When accounting for length of labor, the risk of uterine rupture in induced labor was similar to the risk in spontaneous-onset labor (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-2.36). An initial unfavorable cervical exam was associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture compared to spontaneous (hazard ratio, 4.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.82-9.17). CONCLUSION: After accounting for labor duration, induction is not associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture in women undergoing TOLAC.
引用
收藏
页码:51.e1 / 51.e5
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Uterine scar rupture after a previous cesarean section and induction of labor with prostaglandins
    Vellekoop, J
    Röell-Schorer, EAM
    Van Roosmalen, J
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2006, 85 (02) : 132 - 134
  • [42] Rupture of uterine scar 3 weeks after vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC)
    El-Kehdy, Georges L.
    Ghanem, Joseph K.
    El-Rahi, Chadi C.
    Nakad, Toufic I.
    JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2006, 19 (06): : 371 - 373
  • [43] Damage Control Laparotomy for Uterine Rupture Following Attempted Vaginal Birth after Cesarean
    Morton, Molly
    Fredericks, Charles
    Yon, James R.
    Nagy, Kimberly
    Bokhari, Faran
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2016, 82 (07) : E140 - E141
  • [44] Uterine rupture associated with vaginal birth after cesarean section: A complication of intravaginal misoprostol?
    Gherman, RB
    McBrayer, S
    Browning, J
    GYNECOLOGIC AND OBSTETRIC INVESTIGATION, 2000, 50 (03) : 212 - 213
  • [46] Incidence of uterine rupture among women with mullerian duct anomalies who attempt vaginal birth after cesarean delivery
    Ravasia, DJ
    Brain, PH
    Pollard, JK
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1999, 181 (04) : 877 - 881
  • [47] Perinatal outcomes in diabetics attempting vaginal birth after cesarean versus diabetics who deliver by cesarean without trial of labor
    Rouse-Ho, Amy
    Poursharif, Borzouyeh
    Miller, David
    Reyes, Carolina
    Montoro, Martin
    Goodwin, Thomas
    Korst, Lisa
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 195 (06) : S162 - S162
  • [48] Association between prior vaginal birth after cesarean and subsequent labor outcome
    Krispin, Eyal
    Hiersch, Liran
    Goldsher, Yulia Wilk
    Wiznitzer, Arnon
    Yogev, Yariv
    Ashwal, Eran
    JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2018, 31 (08): : 1066 - 1072
  • [49] Labor characteristics and intrapartum interventions in women with vaginal birth after cesarean section
    Lan, Yehui
    Pan, Shuangjia
    Chen, Baoyi
    Peng, Lingli
    Chen, Ruyang
    Hua, Ying
    Ma, Yanyan
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2022, 22 (01)
  • [50] VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN DELIVERY - TRIAL OF LABOR IN WOMEN WITH BREECH PRESENTATION
    SARNO, AP
    PHELAN, JP
    AHN, MO
    STRONG, TH
    JOURNAL OF REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE, 1989, 34 (10) : 831 - 833