• H Obara, H Minakami, T Koike, S Takamizawa, S Matsubara, and I Sato.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jichi Medical Scool, Tochigi, Japan.
• J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 1998 Apr 1; 24 (2): 129-34.

ObjectiveTo assess and compare the risk associated with a trial of vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) with the risk of an elective repeat cesarean section.MethodsA retrospective review of the records of 310 consecutive women who, at the Jichi Medical School Hospital in the 6-year period of 1990 through 1995, had previously undergone a primary cesarean section and gave birth to a singleton infant weighing > or = 2,000 g at > or = 36 weeks of gestation in a subsequent pregnancy.ResultsElective cesarean sections were performed on 96 (31%) of 310 women, and VBACs were attempted by 214 women (69%). Vaginal deliveries were successful in 132 (43%) of the 310 pregnancies. No maternal death or perinatal deaths occurred in either group. A uterine rupture occurred in 2 (0.9%) of the 214 women who attempted a VBAC, and 5 women (2.3%) gave birth to neonates with a 1-minute Apgar score < or = 6. None of the 96 women who underwent an elective cesarean section had such complications, although the difference in these complication rates did not reach a significant level.ConclusionsA trial of a VBAC significantly reduced the rate of cesarean sections. Although the rates of uterine rupture and neonatal asphyxia were slightly higher in women who attempted a VBAC than in women who underwent an elective cesarean section, obstetricians should offer the option of a trial of labor, because more than one-half of the women with a previous cesarean delivery might have successful vaginal deliveries, and the VBAC-related maternal mortality rate does not reportedly differ between women undergoing a trial of labor and women undergoing an elective repeat cesarean section.

24 keywords...

hide…