|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
OB: Trial of Labor - a Hobson's Choice?From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)Tue Dec 5 07:48:50 2000
from November Grey Journal - Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999 Ellen L. Mozurkewich, MDa [MEDLINE LOOKUP] Eileen K. Hutton, MNSc, RMb [MEDLINE LOOKUP] Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Toronto, Ontario, Canada Abstract TOP Objective: The aim of this study was to compare a trial of labor with elective repeat cesarean delivery among women with previous cesarean delivery. Study Design: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 1989 through 1999 with the following terms: vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, trial of labor, trial of scar, and uterine rupture. We included all controlled trials from developed countries in which the control group had been eligible for a trial of labor. Outcomes of interest were uterine rupture, hysterectomy, maternal febrile morbidity, maternal mortality, 5-minute Apgar score <7, and fetal or neonatal mortality. We computed pooled odds ratios for each outcome. Results: The search strategy identified 52 controlled studies, 37 of which were excluded because many of the control subjects were not eligible for a trial of labor. Fifteen studies with a total of 47,682 women were included. Uterine rupture occurred more frequently among women undergoing a trial of labor than among those undergoing elective repeat cesarean delivery (odds ratio, 2.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-3.05). There was no difference in maternal mortality risk between the 2 groups (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-6.38). Fetal or neonatal death (odds ratio, 1.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.28) and 5-minute Apgar scores <7 (odds ratio, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.88) were more frequent in the trial of labor group than in the control group. Mothers undergoing a trial of labor were less likely to have febrile morbidity (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.77) or to require transfusion (odds ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.76) or hysterectomy (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.57). Conclusion: A trial of labor may result in small increases in the uterine rupture rate and in fetal and neonatal mortality rates with respect to elective repeat cesarean delivery. Maternal morbidity, including febrile morbidity, and the need for transfusion or hysterectomy may be reduced with a trial of labor. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;183:1187-97.)
>From the Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics Only Group Therapy Practitioners deal with more than one patient's interests at the same time - clearly what is in the best interests of one may not be in the best interests of the other. No wonder lawyers love Ob cases. art
-- art fougner, md
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 04:49:00 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.