Re: Brew-ha-ha brewing?
From: Henry Gregor (henrygregor@yahoo.com)
Tue Sep 6 17:33:02 2005
Here's a bit of fur, in the form of a question. The AAFP rep discounts the uterine rupture data, noting prostaglandin use in 12 -12 cases....leaving, what?, another 110 or so ruptures in the VBAC group vs. none in repeat? So are those comparative numbers chopped liver?
"art fougner, md" <evsono@pipeline.com> wrote:And who will place the bell on this proverbial cat? Sit back as the
bloviating fur flies...
art
At Tue, 6 Sep 2005, RModugno@aol.com wrote:
>
>>From 9/1/05 OB/GYN News::
>New clinical guidelines issued by the American Academy of Family Physician
>have raised concerns at the American College of Obstetricians and
>Gynecologists.
>Under those guidelines, a trial of labor after cesarean section should be
>offered to all appropriate candidates, and not restricted to those in
>facilities with surgical teams that are immediately available and present hroughout
>labor.
>The recommendation differs from that of ACOG, which specifies that vaginal
>birth after cesarean (VBAC) should be attempted only in institutions equip ed
>to respond to emergencies with immediately available physicians.
>The AAFP based its new guidelines on the 2003 trial of labor report issued
>by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and on numerous studies
>published since then. None of these data sources contained clinical eviden e
>supporting a restriction of trial of labor to facilities with immediately
>available surgical teams, said AAFP President Mary Frank, M.D.
>“The question is, have there been any studies showing that having he team
>onsite vs. in close proximity increases the risk of death or other problem or
>complications,� she said in an interview. “There are just n studies that
>show an increase in loss of life or bad outcome because the team isn't
>immediately on site.�
>The new AAFP guidelines provoked heated comment from Gary Hankins, M.D.,
>chairman of ACOG's Committee on Obstetric Practice. “It's very tro bling when
>people who may not even be qualified to perform a cesarean section start
>issuing guidelines about the safety of this kind of thing,� Dr. Ha kins told this
>newspaper. “Their argument is that the available data don't prove t's unsafe—
>they're not arguing that it is safe. To me, the motive should be patient
>safety. Guidelines should be outcome-driven—and driven by good out omes.�
>Although the AAFP guidelines don't restrict a trial of labor to certain
>facilities, they do specify that an individually constructed emergency man gement
>plan should be in place for each woman who attempts a trial of labor after
>cesarean (TOLAC). Such a plan would include being able to get a surgical t am
>on site quickly. Dr. Frank said, “We're not saying attempt VBAC wi hout
>surgical support. We understand the necessity for the team to be available close
>by, but that could be on another floor or across the street. We want our
>members to have a plan in place about how to access surgical support quick y.�
>According to the AAFP's guidelines, ACOG's recommendation may unnecessaril
>restrict access to vaginal delivery for some women, especially those livin
>in rural areas. “One consequence of the … policy appears to be that some
>hospitals have discontinued VBAC services entirely, forcing women to prese t late
>in labor, to travel to another facility … or to submit to a schedu ed repeat
>cesarean delivery that they may not have wanted,� the paper says.
>But Dr. Hankins said physicians should offer the safest possible delivery
>strategy, regardless of what the woman might eventually choose to do. â €œWe
>should be offering this in the safest environment possible, and if people on't
>come in, that's their own choice,� he said.
>He also bristled at AAFP's suggestion that ACOG's guidelines are motivated
>by legal worries. According to the AAFP paper, “… current isk management
>policies across the United States restricting a trial of labor after previ us
>cesarean section appear to be based on malpractice concerns rather than on
>available statistical and scientific evidence.�
>Dr. Hankins said, “Our main concern is with having the best possib e outcome
>for mother and baby. If women are given the true numbers about the bad
>outcomes that can be associated with VBAC, no woman is going to take the c ance�
>of laboring without immediately available surgical support.
>It's misleading for AAFP to say there's no evidence that VBAC can be
>dangerous, he added; a 4-year, prospective study of more than 32,000 women clearly
>showed the risks (N. Engl. J. Med. 2004;351:2581–9).
>“In the trial of labor group, there were 124 uterine ruptures and one in
>the elective repeat cesarean group. There were 12 babies with hypoxic-isch mic
>encephalopathy in the TOL group and none in the cesarean group, and 13 inf nt
>deaths vs. 7 in the cesarean group. You don't have to be as statistician t
>see those are highly significant numbers,� Dr. Hankins said.
>The AAFP panel noted this study appeared after its initial literature
>search. But the panel said it would not have changed its recommendations, ecause
>the comparison groups in the study were not equivalent. The TOL group incl ded
>more premature deliveries, which may have skewed the encephalopathy number .
>In addition, prostaglandins were still being used to induce some laboring
>women during this study, which the panel said limited its applicability.
>Prostaglandins are now contraindicated for TOL after cesarean. Of the 124 omen
>with uterine ruptures, 13 had been exposed to prostaglandins.
>The AAFP paper should be viewed as a means of opening the lines of
>communication about trial of labor between doctors and their patients, Dr. Frank said.
>“ACOG is being more conservative, and we are a little more open to dialogue.
>We hope this will encourage our members to talk with their patients about
>the potential risks and the potential benefits. We're not saying do it or on't
>attempt it. We're saying talk with the patient about the risks and what th
>plan is should something happen.�
>*************************************************************************** **
>*************8=20
>*************************************************************************** **
>"The best laid emergency management plans may go awry"
>Robert Modugno MD MBA FACOG
>Marietta, GA
--
art fougner, md
"If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else."
Lawrence Peter Berra
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
