Search

Raha Maroyi,1,2 Bahaya Naomi,2 Madeline K Moureau,3 Balungwe Sifa Marceline,1 Celeste Ingersoll,4 Roselyn Nerville,5 Denis Mukwege1,2,6 1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Panzi Referral Hospital, Bukavu, South Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo; 2Université Evangélique en Afrique (UEA), Bukavu, South Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo; 3Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA; 4Department of Statistics, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA; 5University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 6International Center for Advanced Research and Training (ICART), Bukavu, South Kivu, Democratic Republic of CongoCorrespondence: Raha MaroyiUniversité Evangélique en Afrique (UEA), PO Box: 266, Bukavu, South Kivu, Democratic Republic of CongoTel +243 997 254 812Email ken.raha01@gmail.comPurpose: We sought to determine the success rate of VBAC and factors associated with achieving VBAC at a referral hospital in the Democratic Republic of Congo in women with a subsequent pregnancy greater than or equal to 18 months from their primary cesarean section (CS).Patients and Methods: Patients were included for participation if they had an inter-delivery interval (IDI) of at least 18 months from their primary CS, accepted TOLAC, and had no contraindications. Information was collected about patients’ demographics, obstetric history, and factors impacting their labor process. Descriptive analyses compared patients that had a successful VBAC and those who did not. Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression models identified factors associated with a successful VBAC.Results: Among 231 eligible patients who attempted a VBAC, 57.6% (133) achieved VBAC. Participants had a mean age of 29 (SD 6), with the majority having a prior vaginal delivery (68.8%). VBAC was positively associated with a higher Bishop score (AOR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02, 1.23) and a spontaneous labor onset (AOR 3.06, 95% CI 1.52, 6.17). VBAC was negatively associated with a macrosomic fetus (AOR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08, 0.58).Conclusion: TOLAC results in VBAC more than half the time and is associated with a spontaneous labor onset and a higher Bishop score. Women with a macrosomic fetus were more likely to have an unsuccessful VBAC, resulting in an RCS. An optimal IDI was not enough to ensure a successful VBAC. Upon patients’ arrival to the hospital, practitioners should re-evaluate their eligibility to attempt a VBAC based on their Bishop score and if they had a spontaneous labor onset to decrease the health risks of an RCS.Keywords: trial of labor, delivery, repeat cesarean section, sub-Saharan Africa, Democratic Republic of Congo

This study was designed to evaluate the outcome of the implemented post-cesarean section (CS) surgical site infection (SSI) prevention protocol in Ahmadi Hospital, Kuwait. A total of 229 women who delivered by elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) were included in this comparative study: 112 women who delivered by ERCS after the implemented protocol (study group) compared to 117 controls (who delivered by ERCS before the implemented protocol). The outcome include the incidence of post-CS SSI after and before the implemented protocol and the risk factors which may predispose to post-CS SSI. The incidence of post-CS SSI was significantly high in the controls (who delivered by ERCS before the implemented protocol) compared to the study group (who delivered by ERCS after the implemented protocol) (12.8% (15/117) versus 3.6% (4/112), respectively) (P = 0.01). The relative risk (RR) analysis showed that obesity and pregestational diabetes were significant risks for post-CS SSI (RR 0.35 (95%CI; 0.13–0.99) P = 0.04 and RR 0.24 (95%CI; 0.063–0.93) P = 0.03, respectively). In addition, the prolonged rupture of membranes (ROM) before the ERCS, duration of ERCS (more than 1 h), and surgical difficulties/adhesions during the ERCS were significant risks for post-CS SSI (RR 6.0 (95%CI; 1.003–35.9) P = 0.04, RR 6.0 (95%CI; 1.003–35.9) P = 0.04, and RR 6.0 (95%CI; 1.003–35.9) P = 0.04, respectively). The incidence of post-CS SSI after ERCS significantly reduced following the post-CS SSI prevention protocol. Obesity, pregestational diabetes, prolonged ROM, duration of ERCS (more than 1 h), and surgical difficulties/adhesions during the ERCS were definite risks for post-CS SSI.

Introduction: The success rate of vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) varies among institutions and health care providers. It is also affected by various antepartum, intrapartum factors as well as the difference in the obstetric population. Objectives: The main aim of the study is to determine the factors that affect the success rate of vaginal birth after cesarean section. This will help us to choose the right patients for VBAC thereby decreasing the complications of an emergency cesarean section. Methods: This is a prospective, cohort study done over a period of twelve months. Based on the patient's preference a total of 211 women were divided into two groups either a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC) or elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) group. VBAC group was compared with the failed trial of labor group to determine the factors affecting the success rate. Result: The success rate of VBAC was found to be 47.9%. About 15% of failed VBAC was due to the tendency to abandon a TOLAC midway. The success rate of VBAC increased in women with previous vaginal delivery and in those who went into spontaneous labor. Epidural was found to be safe to use in the trial of the labor group. Conclusion: Women with factors that increase the likelihood for vaginal delivery following cesarean section should be motivated well and referred to a tertiary center to improve the success rate as well as to reduce the maternal and fetal morbidity

Introduction: A strategy for reducing the number of cesarean sections is to allow vaginal delivery after cesarean section. Objective: To validate two predictive models, Metz and Grobman, for successful vaginal delivery after a cesarean section. Methods: Retrospective cohort study involving women with previous history of a previous segmental cesarean section, single pregnancy ≥37 weeks and cephalic presentation. The proportion of vaginal delivery in all pregnant women was determined, and it was compared with those (women) with successful delivery after cesarean section. Then, there were elaborated the models, and their predictive capacity was determined by curve-receiver-operator. Results: The proportion of successful delivery in pregnant women with a previous cesarean section and indication of vaginal delivery was 85.64%. The observed proportion of birth for each decile predicted in the Grobman model was less than 15%, except for the 91-100% decile, where it was 64.09%; the area under the curve was 0.95. For the Metz model, the actual successful delivery rate was lower than predicted in scores between 4 and 14, and within expected for a score between 15 and 23; the area under the curve was 0.94. Conclusions: The vaginal delivery rate after cesarean was lower than expected according to the predictive models of Grobman and Metz. The implementation of these models in a prospective way can lead to a higher rate of successful birth. Resumen Introducción: Una estrategia de reducción del número de cesáreas es permitir el parto vaginal después de cesárea. Objetivo: Validar dos modelos predictivos, Metz y Grobman, para el parto vaginal exitoso después de una cesárea. Métodos: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo con mujeres con antecedente de una cesárea segmentaria previa, embarazo único ≥37 semanas y presentación cefálica . Se determinó la proporción de parto vaginal en todas las gestantes y se comparó con aquellas con parto exitoso después de cesárea, se elaboró los modelos y se determinó la capacidad predictiva de ellos mediante curva-receptor-operador. Resultados: La proporción de parto exitoso en gestantes con cesárea previa e indicación de parto vaginal fue 85.64%. La proporción de parto observado para cada decil predicho en el modelo de Grobman fue inferior al 15%, excepto para el decil 91-100%, en el que fue 64.09%, el área bajo la curva fue 0.95. Para el modelo de Metz, la proporción de parto exitoso real fue menor a lo predicho en puntajes entre 4-14 y dentro de lo esperado para puntaje entre 15-23, con un área bajo la curva de 0.94. Conclusiones: La tasa de parto vaginal después de cesárea fue menor a lo esperado de acuerdo a los modelos predictivos de Grobman y Metz. La implementación de estos modelos en forma prospectiva puede llevar una mayor tasa de parto exitoso.

In our report, we present a case of repeat cesarean section in a 29-year-old Ecuadorian mother who contracted COVID-19 and traveled to the United States during her last trimester of pregnancy. We assembled a multidisciplinary team to safely deliver the mother by cesarean section. She received supportive care for her COVID-19 infection. Infection prevention procedures were based on early available data, and the baby was delivered without complications.

Introduction: Cesarean section is the surgical delivery of a baby through an incision made in the mother's abdomen and uterus. Repeat cesarean section has recently increased, partly because of concern about increased risk of uterine rupture in women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Among the women who underwent cesarean section in their first delivery, 80-96% had a second surgical delivery. Therefore, the present study aimed to describe the prevalence of repeat cesarean section among Nepali women presented at Kathmandu Medical College and Teaching Hospital who had a previous cesarean section. Methods: This was a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in Kathmandu Medical College and Teaching Hospital from 1st of February to 31st of May 2020. Ethical approval was taken from the Institutional Review Committee of the Kathmandu Medical College. Convenient sampling was done. All pregnant patients between gestational ages of 37-40 weeks with previous cesarean section admitted for safe confinement were included in the study. Results: Among the 104 women, who had prior cesarean section, 99 (95.19%) had second cesarean section and 5 (4.81%) had vaginal birth after cesarean. The most common indication for the first cesarean section was fetal distress 31 (29.81%) while the indication for the second cesarean section among previously cesarean section women was cephalo pelvic disproportion 39 (39.40%). Conclusions: The proportion of cesarean section in both first and subsequent delivery is quite high. This high rate may compromise the reproductive future of the women who underwent consecutive cesarean section with possible consequent complications.

Introducción. La cesárea es una operación reservada inicialmente para casos en los que el parto eutócico puede comprometer la vida de la gestante o del producto. Por diversas razones, se ha aceptado a la cesárea como método de parto de elección, aumentando su frecuencia. La OMS estableció un margen de tasa de cesáreas de 15% para las cesáreas primarias, ya que valores mayores no representan una disminución en la morbimortalidad fetal. Mundialmente se ha evidenciado tasas de hasta 21% (países europeos) y, en el Perú, 36% en el año 2015. Objetivos. Determinar la frecuencia e indicaciones más frecuentes de cesáreas en un hospital público docente de Lima. Métodos. Estudio descriptivo, tipo serie de casos, de pacientes sometidas a cesárea y sus indicaciones. Se incluyó a pacientes sometidas a cesáreas, electivas o de emergencia, desde enero 2013 hasta diciembre 2017. Resultados. La cesárea fue realizada con una frecuencia de 50,2%, siendo las indicaciones más frecuentes una cesárea previa y la desproporción cefalopélvica. Conclusiones. El estudio halló que se superó la tasa de cesáreas recomendada por la OMS. La indicación más frecuente en el período estudiado fue la cesárea previa.

Approximately 90% of mothers with a primary C-section have a subsequent C-section. To date, research has demonstrated that primary C-sections are associated with breastfeeding noninitiation. However, it is unknown if this association persists after the primary C-section. Furthermore, literature has shown a differing relationship between breastfeeding initiations by marital status. Due to the high proportion of women who give birth while unmarried, investigating differences by marital status will add a significant contribution to breastfeeding literature. This study investigates the association between repeat C-section and breastfeeding initiation within marital status groups using a nationally representative cross-sectional survey.Data from the 2004 to 2011 Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System were analyzed. The sample was restricted to women with a previous singleton live birth who had C-section and whose infant was alive at the time of interview (N = 34,854). Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to obtain crude and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).After adjusting for potential confounders, married women who had a repeat C-section were 2.2 times (AOR = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.69-2.77) more likely to never breastfeed compared to women with vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC). Similarly, the odds of breastfeeding noninitiation were 76% (AOR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.47-2.12) higher among women with a repeat C-section compared to women with VBAC. No significant associations were exhibited among nonmarried women.Enhanced educational programs and counseling support may be needed to help families cope with delivery challenges and resulting stressors that may reduce their desire to initiate breastfeeding in the postpartum period.

Method: The rate of caesarean section was only slightly higher than recommended by the WHO. Most of caesarean sections were emergency caesarean sections. Data on all live births were collected, including type of delivery, and indication was recorded if cesarean section was done. Total, primary, & repeat cesarean section rates were calculated for each year. The cesarean rate was calculated as the number of cesarean births divided by total live births. The rate for each indication was calculated annually as the number of cesarean births performed for each indication per 1,000 live births. Result: These two groups constituted nearly 87.7% of total C-Sections. Only 3.4% of the cases belonged to the elderly age group of above 35 years. Maximum no. of caesarean sections was in multiparous females (54.3%). Out of 550 caesarean deliveries 76.7% were from urban area. Also, result showed that only 68.7% were booked for antenatal care. Conclusion: The rate of cesarean section has increased with time with primary and repeat cesareans both showing an increase. In the primary CS rate, indications like labor arrest disorders & fetal distress show an increase more than the objective indications like malpresentation. In repeat CS, history of 02 or more previous sections & scar tenderness contributed more than the fetal distress. Keywords: Indication, Caesarean

Cesarean section is the most common surgery performed with over 30% of deliveries occurring via this route. This number is likely to increase given decreasing rates of vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) and primary cesarean delivery on maternal request, which carries the inherent risk for intraoperative complications. Previous C-section delivery was a major indication for a repeat C-section delivery. The present study aims knowing the intra-operative difficulties encountered by an obstetrician, in this highly evolved surgical procedure called C-section especially in a repeat C-section. It was a Prospective observational study conducted on 60 cases of repeat cesarean section in c/o previous one cesarean section. Difficulties encountered while operating on cases of previous one cesarean section were noted. The intraoperative complications were compared with respect to adhesions (peritoneal, bladder, bowel, omental etc), blood loss, extension of tears over uterus, bladder injury, scar dehiscence, uterine rupture, need for hysterectomy. In present study, following intraoperative morbidities were encountered- adhesions 38.33%, advanced bladder 20%, excess blood loss 10%, placenta accrete was found in 1.67%,thinned out scar seen in 5% . Bladder injury seen in 1.67% patients. No cases of uterine rupture & bowel injury were noted. None of the patient needs caesarean hysterectomy. In modern obstetric practice, objective is safe motherhood and healthy baby by proper management. From present study, it can be concluded that repeat caesarean sections in c/o previous one cesarean section are associated with increased complications which lead to increased maternal morbidity Keywords: Primary Cesarean section , Repeat Cesarean section , Caesarean Section Difficulties.

Cesarean deliveries have risen significantly over the past few decades due to advanced maternal age, defensive obstetric practice, medico-legal concerns, and maternal request. A cesarean section is a life-saving surgical procedure when certain complications arise during pregnancy and labor. However, it is a major surgery and is associated with immediate maternal and perinatal risks and may have implications for future pregnancies as well as long-term effects that are still being investigated. A major obstetric hazard of repeat cesarean section is the increased risk of uterine scar rupture during pregnancy resulting in high fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality. Also, there are increased risks associated with placenta previa and placenta accreta spectrum. We present a unique case of a woman who underwent her 10th cesarean section which was uncomplicated.

Introduction Rising rates of caesarean section (CS) is an issue of particular concern. Recently, there has been research supporting Vaginal Births After Caesarean (VBAC), which is controversial. In Greece, over half of births in the country are by CS, placing Greece among countries with the highest CS rates. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and the factors associated with VBACs and to compare the maternal/neonatal outcomes with a 'non-caesarean' control group. Methods The data were evaluated and retrospectively gathered on archived singleton births, from medical records of a midwifery-led team, between May 2006 and May 2013. The target group of the study included mothers with a previous CS, who had a second birth. The sample consisted of 71 VBAC women and 583 who had normal spontaneous vaginal delivery (NSVD) as the 'non-caesarean' control group. Results The duration of labour was longer for the VBACs compared with first-time mothers who gave birth naturally (for duration 481-720 min, 27% vs 10.3%, respectively), episiotomy was more common for VBAC (20.7% vs 7.9%), and epidural analgesia was more often for VBAC (68.4% vs 10%). The percentage of 1-min Apgar score in the range 0-7 in the VBAC group was 5%, and there was no significant difference in women who had NSVD (3.6%). The Apgar score in the 5th minute was always above 8 for both groups. Conclusions Severe maternal and neonatal complications are infrequent, and therefore the necessity arises for further continuous studies to ascertain the safety of VBAC.

Objective To identify socio-cultural and clinician determinants in the decision-making process in the choice for trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) or elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) in delivering women. Methods A tailored questionnaire focused on epidemiological, socio-cultural and obstetric data was administered to 133 patients; of these, 95 were admitted for assistance at birth at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” (FPG) IRCCS, Rome, and 38 at S. Chiara Hospital (SCH), Trento, Italy. Descriptive analysis and logistic regression modeling were performed. Results Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rates were higher at SCH than at FPG (68.4% vs. 23.2%; P Conclusion In the attempt to promote person-centered care, increases in TOLAC/VBAC rates could be achieved by focusing on individual maternal needs. An ad hoc strategy for making birth safer should begin from accurate information at the time of the previous CS.

Introduction: Cesarean section is one of the common obstetric procedures done when the childbirth is not anticipated to occur by the normal vaginal delivery. There has been increased rate of cesarean section globally as well as in our country in recent decades. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study has been carried out by reviewing a year of data from maternity ward of Paschimanchal Community Hospital, Prithvi Chowk, Pokhara. The total number of delivery, their modes either vaginal or cesarean, indications for the cesarean section and their outcomes were analyzed. The obtained data was entered and analyzed in Microsoft Excel. Results: Total of 257 cases underwent delivery during the study period and 174 (63.27%) were by cesarean section. Oligohydramnios is the most common indication for cesarean section. Around 25 (14.36%) of the women underwent repeat cesarean section. Conclusions: The rate of cesarean section was quite high in our study and further studies are recommended for understanding of causes and other associated factors with it.

Background: Cesarean section is the commonest obstetric procedure done worldwide. Incidence of cesarean section is increasing giving it a term “repeat cesarean section”. Repeat cesarean section makes future obstetrics performances and abdominal exploration risky. After any Laparotomy it is fairly common to develop scar tissue, or adhesion. The scarring and adhesion formation is known to increase the major complications rate from 4.3% to 12.5% depending on the number of previous section. Intra peritoneal adhesions have an incidence of 5.5% to 42.5%. Methods: An observational prospective study was conducted in Obstetrics and gynecology department of Era’s Lucknow Medical College, Lucknow. Total 80 cases of repeat cesarean sections were included. The case histories and intra operative findings were recorded. Results: Intra peritoneal adhesions of varied types were seen in majority of cases, out of which the most commonly seen adhesion was between parietal peritoneum and anterior surface of uterus 24(30%) and adhesion between bladder and uterus 24(30%). Conclusions: Chances of developing adhesions increases with each cesarean section, which leads to increase in morbidity of women. Thus cases of previous cesarean section should be educated about routine antenatal care.

Despite the consequences for women’s health, a repeat cesarean section (CS) birth after a previous CS is common in Western countries. Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) is recommended for most women, yet VBAC rates are decreasing and vary across maternity organizations and countries. We investigated women’s views on factors of importance for improving the rate of VBAC in countries where VBAC rates are high. We interviewed 22 women who had experienced VBAC in Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden. We used content analysis, which revealed five categories: receiving information from supportive clinicians, receiving professional support from a calm and confident midwife/obstetrician during childbirth, knowing the advantages of VBAC, letting go of the previous childbirth in preparation for the new birth, and viewing VBAC as the first alternative for all involved when no complications are present. These findings reflect not only women’s needs but also sociocultural factors influencing their views on VBAC.

Introduction: In modern Obstetrics, with rising trends of primary Cesarean section (CS) for fetal and maternal interests, pregnancy over the scarred uterus is a challenge to all treating obstetricians. How better the cesarean scar is sutured, its exact fate in next pregnancy is still not measurable. Objective of this study was to evaluate the status of previous cesarean scar during repeat cesarean section (RCS) and calculate the maternal morbidity in those cases in a tertiary hospital. Methods: It was a descriptive, retrospective study conducted at department of Obstetrics of Lumbini Medical College Teaching Hospital. The study was conducted from 15th July 2014 to 14th July 2015. The data were retrieved from the department of Medical Records. Women undergoing RCS were enrolled. The status of scar was evaluated in terms of intact scar, scar rupture, scar dehiscence, thin lower uterine segment, scar placenta previa, and adhesions as indicator of scar integrity. Results: There were 534 (25.4%) CS among 2,098 deliveries during the study period. Ninety one (17.04%) of them were RCS. Elective RCS were 73.6% (n=67), and emergency RCS were 26.4% (n=24). Eighty two (90.1%) women had RCS once and 9 (9.9%) had RCS for second time. Scar was intact in 22 (91.6%), scar dehiscence in 1 (8.3%), scar with adhesions in 1 (8.3%) among emergency RCS and intact in 53 (91.3%) and scar with adhesions in 5 (8.7%) among elective RCS. Among nine women of two RCS, three (37.5%) had thin scar, five (62.5%) had well formed scar, seven (87.5%) had intact scar, and one (12.5%) had scar with adhesion. There was no scar dehiscence and no scar rupture in two RCS women. Adhesions were documented twice higher in women whose primary CS was undertaken outside our hospital. Placenta previa and placenta accreta each were found in two cases. Conclusion: Most of the scars of repeat Cesarean section were healthy with no scar rupture. We can consider trial of labor for scarred uterus with strict vigilance and in need, CS is always at option.

Background: As cesarean birth rates continue to rise, more women are faced with the choice of planning a vaginal delivery or a repeat cesarean section after a previous cesarean section. The objective of this prospective study was to study the morbidities and mortality of women attempting a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) versus elective repeat cesarean section (El-RCS).Methods: Prospective data was recorded on management practices, associated complications and morbidity & mortality for a period of 8 months on 15664 consecutive cases of previous cesarean section reporting at 30 medical colleges/ teaching hospitals for delivery.Results: A trial of labor was planned in 25.8% (4035) women and 34.5% (5399) women underwent elective repeat cesarean section and rest had emergency repeat cesarean section. Overall maternal morbidity due to any cause was 20.7% among El-RCS as compared to 14.2% in TOLAC which was statistically significant (OR: 1.57, CI: 1.41-1.76, P=0.00). Blood loss of more than 1000ml was around 8.0% among TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 8.8% (OR: 0.89, CI: 0.77-1.94, p=0.14 not statistically significant). Blood transfusion was given in 3.7% in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was given in 6.5% (OR: 0.56, CI: 0.45-0.68, p=0.00 highly significant). Complication like dehiscence of scar was similar in both groups. Post-operative complication were seen in 2.8% cases in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 5.8% (OR: 0.47, CI: 0.38-0.59, p=0.00 highly significant). Uterine rupture was 0.3% in TOLAC where as in El-RCS it was 0.7% (OR: 0.43, CI: 0.21-0.87, p=0.009 statistically significant). Maternal mortality was reported in 0.2% cases of TOLAC as compared to 0.1% cases in El-RCS (p=0.17) which was not statistically significant.Conclusions: Maternal morbidity was found to be more in elective repeat cesarean section than trial of labor after cesarean section.

Objective To determine the delivery mode preferred by pregnant women with 1 previous cesarean delivery and to investigate the relationship between preferred and actual mode of delivery. Method We reviewed the records of 215 women who were delivered in a London hospital with a history of 1 cesarean delivery. Women who planned an elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) were compared with those who planned a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Results Although 55.3% chose VBAC overall, only 37.8% of those who chose it were delivered by it, whereas 94.8% of those who chose ERCS were delivered by ERCS. Nonwhite women were more likely to choose VBAC than white women (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.9–6.1) but less likely to be deliver by it (odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.14–0.68). Conclusion In this study, VBAC was the method of delivery preferred by most women. Nonwhite women were more likely to choose VBAC over ERCS but less likely to be delivered by VBAC.

Over the last three decades, there is a steady rise in cesarean sections globally [1]. This has mainly happened due to expanding indications for primary cesarean section. We now perform elective CS in almost all breech pregnancies; preterm labor; various pregnancy situations such as associated medical problems, e.g., diabetes, hypertension, and immune problems; IVF pregnancies; advanced age pregnancies; and morbidly obese mothers. These higher rates of primary cesarean sections have led to very high repeat cesarean section rates! In almost all recent surveys for indications for CS, “previous cesarean section” has become the number one indication, contributing to almost 40–50 % of CS. The US data also shows a rise from 21 % to 32 % in 15 years [2]. These factors like previous cesarean section, morbidly obese woman, and preterm elective cesarean section have brought in their wake peculiar situations for the delivery of the baby during CS. We have tried to discuss various difficulties encountered in delivering the baby during CS and various means to minimize trauma to the baby as well as to the mother. We have also outlined current concepts and have enlisted suggestions to ease the delivery of the baby with the evidence base. Difficult fetal extraction occurs in approximately one in ten cesarean deliveries, more commonly seen with preterm, elective, and late intrapartum cesarean sections.

Introduction: Increased prevalence of uterus with prior cesarean sections is due to rising rate of cesarean births worldwide. Birth management after a prior cesarean section is a challenging issue, since medical practices are divergent. Objectives: Analyze pregnancy outcome and management of childbirth from a uterus with one cesarean scar. Setting and method: It was an observational, descriptive and cross-sectional study carried out from December 15, 2014 to September 14, 2015 in the University Clinic of Gynecology and Obstetrics (CUGO) of the National University Teaching Hospital (CNHU-HKM) of Cotonou. It involved 132 female patients. The data were analyzed with Epi Info 7 software. Results: The prevalence of childbirth on uterus with one prior C-section is 7.57%. Patients' mean age was 30 years. Most of them were admitted for second childbirth. Most pregnancies were singleton ones (94.70%). The interval between cesarean section and current childbirth is higher than 24 months in most cases (83.76%). The rate of uterine contraction is low (29.55%); the same applies to the one of vaginal birth (25%). The main indications for repeat cesarean section were narrowing of the pelvis (19.19%), acute fetal distress (14.14%) and renal vascular diseases (11.11%). The maternal and perinatal prognosis for vaginal birth had been better than the one of repeat cesarean section. Conclusion: The challenging issue of childbirth management in women with one prior C-section is still a matter of concern in Cotonou. Some efforts still have to be made to improve technical medical equipment so as to extend the indications for uterine contraction during labor, thereby contributing to reduce the rate of repeat cesarean section.

To the Editor, I have read with great interest the article entitled “Maternal and obstetrical factors associated with a successful trial of vaginal birth after cesarean section” by Abdelazim et al. (1) that was published in the previous issue of the Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association. In this article, the authors brought to our attention the significance of distinct risk factors that could affect the outcome of a trial of labor after cesarean section (TOLAC). Although the report by Abdelazim and coworkers confirms findings from previous studies, I would like to include some considerations on the subject. The objective of this study was to evaluate the risk factors associated with TOLAC, but the authors seem to overlook one important factor related to the results of this study. Previous history of vaginal delivery before cesarean section is not defined by the authors. The predictive role of prior vaginal delivery is strictly related to the outcomes of TOLAC and may require further clarification and discussion. TOLAC is an important strategy to limit repeat cesarean sections and the complications related to the procedure. Although maternal morbidity in women with previous cesareans is higher when TOLAC fails, identifying the optimal patient who would attain maximum benefit is crucial. For this reason, determining risk factors before deciding whether the patient can undergo TOLAC or repeat cesarean section is important for the obstetrician. In the process of decision-making, it must be noted that patients with a prior vaginal delivery have higher rates of successful vaginal births after cesarean (VBAC) than patients without a prior vaginal birth (2). Although evaluation of individual risks is important in determining who are appropriate candidates for TOLAC, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (3) defines prior vaginal birth and spontaneous labor as a strong predictor for TOLAC success. In view of this data, Grobman et al. (4) were the first to report the most utilized and validated model for predicting the probability of successful TOLAC. In this model, it is demonstrated that vaginal delivery and prior VBAC are the two characteristics that are useful for predicting successful TOLAC. These findings also have been repeatedly validated by multiple studies (5).

Objective Most women eligible for a trial of labor after a cesarean (TOLAC) undergo an elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS). We hypothesized that this is largely because of poor patient education. Study Design This was a prospective study of women who presented to our hospital from November 2010 through July 2011 who were candidates for TOLAC. Women filled out a questionnaire prior to their scheduled ERCS or upon admission for TOLAC. A χ 2 and a Student t test were used, as appropriate. Results The study included 155 women, 87 for TOLAC and 68 for ERCS. Women in both groups demonstrated a lack of knowledge on the risks and benefits of TOLAC and ERCS. When patients perceived their providers as having a preference for ERCS, very few chose TOLAC, whereas the majority chose TOLAC if this was their provider's preference. Conclusion Candidates for TOLAC appear to know little about the risks and benefits associated with their mode of delivery, and provider preference affects this choice.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW To review the current literature on vaginal birth after cesarean delivery efficacy and safety. RECENT FINDINGS There are two major themes in current vaginal birth after cesarean delivery research. The first is continued work on the short-term safety, including maternal events such as uterine rupture and perinatal death. The second theme focuses on identifying predictors for success and failure. SUMMARY Current information suggests that the rate of major maternal and neonatal complications with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery is low, and this option should be offered to women with a single prior low transverse cesarean. Future research should focus on an evaluation of both short-term and long-term consequences of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery compared with elective repeat cesarean section.

Background: Cesarean section has become more prevalent over the years due to various factors and is exceeding the tolerable limit specified by WHO. The objective of this study was to analyze cesarean section rates in our department and to identify the factors that contributed to rising cesarean section rate considering both institutional aspects as well as socioeconomic causes.Methods: It was a retrospective study conducted between May 2015 to April 2016 and included all pregnant patients booked in antenatal clinic and unbooked patients admitted in early labour in whom cesarean section was conducted later along with cases coming in emergency for which cesarean section was indicated. Data was collected and categorized on the basis of age, parity, socioeconomic status, education and according to Robson’s ten group classification.Results: The cesarean section rate was found to be 33.2% in our study. The most common indication was repeat cesarean section, fetal distress, and breech presentation. Robson’s group1 had maximum cesarean rates followed by group 5, 6 and 3.Conclusions: Tertiary care centers cannot be expected to have a similar rate as primary and secondary ones due to high number of complex cases referred to them. Though effort should be made to keep the cesarean rate at a low level as suggested by WHO but denying it for an indicated case just to adhere to keep low rate jeopardizes maternal and fetal health. Hence no definitive guidelines can be followed and a very judicious approach is needed.

Background Spontaneous triplets in a uterus didelphys are an extremely rare finding. Only four other cases are reported in the literature. Case A 24 year old gravida 3 para 2-0-0-2 conceived spontaneous triplets in a uterine didelphys. She developed cervical insufficiency and underwent cerclage placement at 17 weeks. After spontaneous rupture of membranes at 29 weeks gestation, she underwent repeat cesarean section, with delivery of three viable fetuses. Mother and all three babies are currently alive and well. Conclusion Expectant management with cerclage placement is a possible alternative to selective reduction for desiring patients with triplets in a uterus didelphys.

Cesarean section is one of the most common surgical operations performed on women worldwide. This review will consider the benefits and harms of both vaginal birth after cesarean section and elective repeat cesarean section for women in a subsequent pregnancy. In addition, consideration will be given to the role of induction of labor for women with a prior cesarean birth, women's views and preferences for care, and future research directions.

Background: There has been a wide range of success rates reported for those achieving vaginal birth following a planned vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Objective: (1) To find out the incidence of rupture uterus and dehiscence in patients with trial of labor after cesarean section, (2) to evaluate the incidence of vaginal delivery in women who had previously undergone a cesarean section, and (3) comparison of a trial of labor after cesarean with an elective repeat cesarean section (ERCS) in view of maternal outcomes. Materials and Methods: This prospective observational study was carried out in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, PDU Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat, India, from January 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015. Result: During the study period, 10,315 deliveries were noted, of which patients who underwent a previous cesarean section were 1,082. Among the previous cesarean cases, trial of labor was given for 222 of them, of which, successful VBAC was found in 136 (61.26%) cases, while in 86 (38.74%) cases, an emergency cesarean was performed. In 860 cases, ERCS was done. Incidence of rupture and dehiscence in trial of labor group was 4.5% (10 cases) and 2.7% (6 cases), respectively, while no rupture was noted in the ERCS group. Scar dehiscence was found in 8 cases (0.93%) in the ERCS group. In 2 cases among the trial of labor group, obstetric hysterectomy was performed for rupture, while in 2 cases, bladder injury was noted. No maternal morbidities were noted in the ERCS group. No mortality was recorded in the study period. Conclusion: Hence, decision for trial of labor or ERCS should be taken as per the patient’s choice, through detailed history and examination. Even though many studies showing success rate of VBAC higher, maternal morbidities associated complications of trial of labor are life threatening, and we conclude ERCS is safer when compared with VBAC in view of maternal outcome.

OBJECTIVE : To determine physician's perceptions about vaginal birth after cesarean section and compare them to the physicians' actual practice experience. STUDY DESIGN : Physicians responded to a questionnaire on their perceptions of vaginal birth after cesarean section. Between July 1, 1991, and June 30, 1992, all attempts at vaginal birth after cesarean section were reviewed. All cesarean deliveries were also reviewed to determine which repeat cesarean sections could have been avoided. RESULTS : One hundred twenty-four patients attempted vaginal birth after cesarean section, and 95 (76.6%) were successful. Physician perceptions revealed a success rate of 73.6%. Those patients whose labor was induced in their attempt at vaginal birth after cesarean section were less successful (41.9%) than those who did not require induction (88.2%) (P

Many women with previous multiple cesarean sections become pregnant and are exposed to certain risk for a variety of complications for both mother and neonate. Some catastrophic complications during pregnancy and labor after a previous cesarean section were shown to be increased. But there are also studies reporting that uterine rupture or placental implantation disorders with serious consequences for the mother or fetus occur infrequently. It is generally believed that neither vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) nor repeat cesarean section is free of risk but successful VBAC usually entails less morbidity than repeat cesarean section. Although there is a strong consensus that a trial of labor is appropriate for most women with prior low transverse cesarean sections increased experience with VBAC indicates that there are potential problems. Reports have implicated numerous maternal and neonatal complications associated with an unsuccessful trial of labor. (excerpt)

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to determine whether the reported increased morbidity associated with failed attempted vaginal birth after cesarean section is attributable to the presence of a uterine scar alone or to labor preceding a cesarean section. STUDY DESIGN: Primiparous women ( N = 237) who underwent repeat cesarean section after a failed trial of vaginal birth after cesarean section were retrospectively compared with 1582 nulliparous women who underwent a primary cesarean section after a failed trial of labor. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in maternal or neonatal morbidity between the two groups except for an increase in the prevalence of thin meconium in patients undergoing primary cesarean section. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the presence of a previous cesarean section scar does not increase the overall baseline morbidity associated with cesarean section after labor. (AM J OBSTET GYNECOL 1992;167:1513-7.)

Allowing a trial of labor in patients who have had a single low transverse cesarean section has become increasingly accepted and widespread in the United States. Evidence with regard to the safety of this practice in patients with two or more prior cesarean births has, however, been sparse. We performed a retrospective review of the charts of 170 patients who had undergone two or more low transverse cesarean deliveries and subsequently delivered at Wishard Memorial Hospital between January 1, 1983, and December 31, 1987. Of 35 of these women who underwent a trial of labor, 27 (77%) had a successful vaginal delivery. No increase in maternal or fetal morbidity or mortality was associated with labor. The women who underwent trial of labor had fewer postpartum complications and shorter hospital stays. Although the number of patients in this study was small, growing evidence appears to support a trial of labor in patients with two or more prior cesarean sections as a safe and successful alternative to elective repeat cesarean section.

Despite the known medical safety and success of vaginal birth after cesarean section, rates of planned repeat cesarean sections remain high. The process involved in women's decisions to choose vaginal birth after cesarean section or repeat cesarean section was investigated by a questionnaire study at a private and a public hospital. Women were questioned regarding timing, influence of others, reasons for their choice, satisfaction with the decision, etc. Results from 160 respondents showed that over half the women identified themselves as the primary decision maker. Physicians exerted more influence on the decisions of patients at the public hospital than on the patients at the private hospital. Overall, social exigencies appeared to play a more important role than an assessment of the medical risks in making these decisions.

Purpose: In our Department of Obstetrics, where 1600 deliveries are carried out on average every year, cesarean section (c.s.) with Misgav Ladach methods has been practiced since November 1995, for 2078 cases in all. In our study, we have examined sonographically 309 repeat c.s. with Misgav Ladach methods compared to 318 traditional repeat c.s. The aim of our investigation is the sonographic examination of patients with open peritoneum and those with closed peritoneum to discriminate the frequency of bladder flap hematomas and other complications in the two techniques. Methods: The patients were examined by transvaginal and transabdominal sonography, on the third and 10th postoperative day, to demonstrate the presence of a fluid or mixed mass on the lower-uterine-segment (LUS) of 3 cm or more, clean wall, with reinforcement of distal echoes. Results: It has been observed that, in the group open peritoneum c.s., there were masses of mixed echostructure referring to hematomas on the 12th day in nine cases, while in the group closed visceral peritoneum in 51 cases (P 38.5 °C). In Misgav Ladach method, only seven women had adhesion of light-medium importance so that uterine exteriorization was not necessary, and not significant (NS) in comparison with the reference of nine women. Conclusion: Peritoneum closure in repeat c.s. lengthens operative time and in some cases favors bladder-flap hematomas which increase postoperative morbidity (P

Most studies on vaginal birth after cesarean section come from medical centers or university hospitals. However, the minority of births in the United States occur in these hospitals. When compared with larger institutions, many small hospitals have longer operating start-up times, less adequate blood banking facilities, and decreased obstetrical anesthesia support. Over a 30-month period in a small hospital, a trial of labor was successful in 76% of patients with prior cesarean section. Despite the limitations of support in a small hospital, vaginal birth can be offered to selected patients with prior cesarean section delivery. In our experience, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery requires significantly more physician hours in the hospital than does repeat cesarean section. The problem of a pregnancy with a prior cesarean section is an ever-increasing one and, in our practice, approximately 25% of multiparous patients have had a prior cesarean delivery.

Elective repeat cesarean section continues to remain the standard of care in the United States. This paper is a study of 242 patients with previous cesarean section who requested and were allowed a trial of labor. One hundred sixty-six (69%) achieved successful vaginal delivery with no maternal or fetal mortality or significant morbidity. Review of the English literature indicates similar results in other independent studies. Continued accumulation of cases showing the efficacy of post-cesarean section trial of labor should encourage a reassessment of the continuing practice of elective repeat cesarean section.