• Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand · Apr 2012

    Comparative Study

    Twin births: cesarean section or vaginal delivery?

    • Elise Hoffmann, Anna Oldenburg, Line Rode, Ann Tabor, Steen Rasmussen, and Lillian Skibsted.
    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Roskilde University Hospital, Denmark. elisehoffmann@gmail.com
    • Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2012 Apr 1;91(4):463-9.

    ObjectiveTo assess morbidity and mortality in twin pregnancy deliveries, according to chorionicity and mode of delivery.DesignPopulation-based retrospective cohort.SettingFourteen obstetric departments in Denmark.PopulationOne thousand one hundred and seventy-five twin pregnancies with two live fetuses at 36(+0) weeks of gestation.MethodsPregnancy outcomes assessed according to chorionicity and mode of delivery.Main Outcome MeasuresPoor outcome defined as five min Apgar score ≤ 7, umbilical artery pH < 7.10, admission to neonatal unit for more than three days or death.ResultsDichorionic (DC) twins, delivered after 36 gestational weeks, with intended vaginal delivery (n= 689) compared with DC twins with planned cesarean section (n= 371) had an increased risk of poor outcome [odds ratio (OR) 1.47, p= 0.037] after adjustment for body mass index, parity and weight discordance. There was no increased risk for poor outcome in monochorionic (MC) twins with intended vaginal delivery (n= 63) compared with planned cesarean section (n= 52; OR 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.26-2.96). Nulliparity increased the risk of poor outcome in DC (OR 1.5, p= 0.03) and in MC twins (OR 4.01, p= 0.02), as well as birthweight discordance >300 g (DC, OR 1.50, p= 0.02; and MC, OR 6.02, p= 0.002). For DC twins, we found a significantly higher risk of poor outcome of the second-born twin compared with the first (OR 1.64, p= 0.001).ConclusionsDichorionic twins born after 36 weeks of gestation had a higher risk of poor outcome by intended vaginal delivery than by planned cesarean section. For MC twins, statistical differences in outcome by mode of delivery could not be seen.© 2012 The Authors Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica© 2012 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…