Maternal and fetal risks of planned vaginal breech delivery vs planned caesarean section for term breech birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:12
|
作者
Fernandez-Carrasco, Francisco J. [1 ,2 ]
Cristobal-Canadas, Delia [3 ]
Gomez-Salgado, Juan [4 ,5 ]
Vazquez-Lara, Juana M. [4 ]
Rodriguez-Diaz, Luciano [4 ]
Parron-Carreno, Tesifon [6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Punta Europa Hosp, Dept Gynaecol & Obstet, Cadiz, Spain
[2] Univ Cadiz, Fac Nursing, Nursing & Physiotherapy Dept, Algeciras, Spain
[3] Torrecardenas Univ Hosp, Neonatal & Paediat Intens Care Unit, Almeria, Spain
[4] Univ Granada, Midwifery Teaching Unit Ceuta, Ceuta Univ Hosp, Dept Gynaecol & Obstet, Ceuta, Spain
[5] Espiritu Santo Univ, Safety & Hlth Postgrad Programme, Guyaquil, Ecuador
[6] Univ Almeria, Sch Hlth Sci, Almeria, Spain
[7] Hlth Delegat Almeria, Terr Delegat Equal Hlth & Social Policies, Almeria, Spain
关键词
PAPERS; mortality; perinatal trauma; Apgar; neonatal intensive care unit (ICU) admittance; and maternal morbidity; ac; NEWCASTLE-OTTAWA SCALE; NETHERLANDS; MORBIDITY; OUTCOMES; QUALITY; TRIAL; STILL; MODE;
D O I
10.7189/jogh.12.04055
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Background Breech presentation delivery approach is a controver-sial issue in obstetrics. How to cope with breech delivery (vaginal or C-section) has been discussed to find the safest in terms of morbid-ity. The aim of this study was to assess the risks of foetal and mater-nal mortality and perinatal morbidity associated with vaginal deliv-ery against elective caesarean in breech presentations, as reported in observational studies. Methods Studies assessing perinatal morbidity and mortality asso-ciated with breech presentations births. Cochrane, Medline, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cuiden databases were consulted. This protocol was registered in PROSPERO CRD42020197598. Selection criteria were: years between 2010 and 2020, in English language, and full-term gestation (37-42 weeks). The methodological quality of the eligible articles was assessed according to the Newcastle -Ot-tawa scale. Meta-analyses were performed to study each parameter related to neonatal mortality and maternal morbidity. Results The meta-analysis included 94 285 births with breech pre-sentation. The relative risk of perinatal mortality was 5.48 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.61-11.51) times higher in the vaginal delivery group, 4.12 (95% CI = 2.46-6.89) for birth trauma and 3.33 (95% CI = 1.95-5.67) for Apgar results. Maternal morbidity showed a relative risk 0.30 (95% CI = 0.13-0.67) times higher in the planned caesarean group. Conclusions An increment in the risk of perinatal mortality, birth trauma, and Apgar lower than 7 was identified in planned vaginal delivery. However, the risk of severe maternal morbidity because of complications of a planned caesarean was slightly higher.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Breech Presentation at Term: Caesarean Section or Vaginal Delivery?
    Djuric, Janko
    Arsenijevic, Slobodan
    Bankovic, Dragic
    Protrka, Zoran
    Sorak, Marija
    Dimitrijevic, Aleksandra
    Zivanovic, Aleksandar
    SRPSKI ARHIV ZA CELOKUPNO LEKARSTVO, 2011, 139 (3-4) : 155 - 160
  • [22] Breech delivery at term - Cesarean section versus planned delivery
    Audra, P
    Bretones, S
    Mellier, G
    CONTRACEPTION FERTILITE SEXUALITE, 1997, 25 (02): : R1 - R4
  • [23] Vaginal delivery versus caesarean section in preterm breech delivery: a systematic review
    Bergenhenegouwen, L. A.
    Meertens, L. J. E.
    Schaaf, J.
    Nijhuis, J. G.
    Mol, B. W.
    Kok, M.
    Scheepers, H. C.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2014, 172 : 1 - 6
  • [24] Mothers' Views of Their Childbirth Experiences 2 Years After Planned Caesarean Versus Planned Vaginal Birth for Breech Presentation at Term, in the International Randomized Term Breech Trial
    Hodnett, Ellen D.
    Hannah, Mary E.
    Hewson, Sheila
    Whyte, Hilary
    Amankwah, Kofi
    Cheng, Mary
    Gafni, Amiram
    Guselle, Patricia
    Helewa, Michael
    Hutton, Eileen
    Kung, Rose
    McKay, Darren
    Saigal, Saroj
    Willan, Andrew
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY CANADA, 2005, 27 (03) : 224 - 231
  • [25] What are the maternal outcomes in planned elective caesarean section compared to planned trial of vaginal birth? A systematic review
    Azam, S.
    Khan, K.
    Khanam, A.
    Tirlapur, S. A.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2013, 120 : 142 - 143
  • [26] Breech Presentation: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Maternal Benefits and Risks of Planned Cesarean Delivery compared to Planned Vaginal Delivery
    Korb, D.
    GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE FERTILITE & SENOLOGIE, 2020, 48 (01): : 109 - 119
  • [27] Reported outcomes for planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal delivery: A systematic review
    Leow, Hui Wei
    Tan, Elizabeth Lilinn
    Black, Mairead
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2021, 256 : 101 - 108
  • [28] Planned cesarean delivery vs planned vaginal delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Adewale, Victoria
    Varotsis, Dante
    Iyer, Neel
    Di Mascio, Daniele
    Dupont, Axelle
    Abramowitz, Laurent
    Steer, Philip J.
    Gimovsky, Martin
    Berghella, Vincenzo
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY MFM, 2023, 5 (12)
  • [29] Feasibility of a randomized controlled trial of planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term - Reply
    Eller, DP
    VanDorsten, JP
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 174 (04) : 1393 - 1394
  • [30] Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: The International Randomized Term Breech Trial
    Whyte, H
    Hannah, ME
    Saigal, S
    Hannah, WJ
    Hewson, S
    Amankwah, K
    Cheng, M
    Gafni, A
    Guselle, P
    Helewa, M
    Hodnett, ED
    Hutton, E
    Kung, R
    McKay, D
    Ross, S
    Willan, A
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 191 (03) : 864 - 871