Elective repeat caesarean section versus induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth
- 18 October 2006
- reference entry
- review article
- Published by Wiley
- No. 4,p. CD004906
- https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004906.pub2
Abstract
Background When a woman has had a previous caesarean birth and requires induction of labour in a subsequent pregnancy, there are two options for her care: elective repeat caesarean or planned induction of labour. While there are risks and benefits for both elective repeat caesarean birth and planned induction of labour, current sources of information are limited to non‐randomised cohort studies. Studies designed in this way have significant potential for bias and consequently conclusions based on these results are limited in their reliability and should be interpreted with caution. Objectives To assess, using the best available evidence, the benefits and harms of elective repeat caesarean section and planned induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (January 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 1) and PubMed (1966 to January 2006). Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials with reported data that compared outcomes in mothers and babies who planned a repeat elective caesarean section with outcomes in women who planned induction of labour, where a previous birth had been by caesarean. Data collection and analysis There was no data extraction performed. Main results There were no randomised controlled trials identified. Authors' conclusions Planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned induction of labour for women with a prior caesarean birth are both associated with benefits and harms. Evidence for these care practices is drawn from non‐randomised studies, associated with potential bias. Any results and conclusions must therefore be interpreted with caution. Randomised controlled trials are required to provide the most reliable evidence regarding the benefits and harms of both planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth.Keywords
This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit:
- The MFMU Cesarean Registry: Factors affecting the success of trial of labor after previous cesarean deliveryAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2005
- Uterine rupture after induction of labour in women with previous caesarean sectionBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2005
- Maternal and Perinatal Outcomes Associated with a Trial of Labor after Prior Cesarean DeliveryThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Modified Bishop's score and induction of labor in patients with a previous cesarean deliveryAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2004
- Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birthPublished by Wiley ,2004
- Factors predisposing to perinatal death related to uterine rupture during attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section: retrospective cohort studyBMJ, 2004
- The Management of VBAC at Term: A Survey of Canadian ObstetriciansJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 2003
- ACOG Committee Opinion No. 271: Induction of Labor for Vaginal Birth After Cesarean DeliveryObstetrics & Gynecology, 2002
- Risk of Uterine Rupture during Labor among Women with a Prior Cesarean DeliveryThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study Commentary: all women should have a choice Commentary: increase in caesarean sections may reflect medical control not women's choice Commentary: "health has become secondary to a sexually attractive body"BMJ, 1999