• Françoise Vendittelli, Olivier Rivière, Catherine Crenn-Hébert, Didier Riethmuller, Jean-Patrick Schaal, Michel Dreyfus, and Perinatal Sentinel Network, AUDIPOG.
• AUDIPOG (Association of Health Workers Using an Electronic File in Paediatrics, Obstetrics and Gynaecology), Medical University RTH Laennec, Lyon, France. fvendittelli@chu-clermontferrand.fr
• Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Oct 1;90(10):1147-56.

ObjectiveEvaluation of elective cesarean section for twin delivery as a standard of care.DesignHistorical cohort in a national database (2 597 twin pregnancies).SettingFrance.SampleTwins with first child in cephalic presentation.MethodsDecision analysis.Main Outcome MeasuresAll neonatal complications, i.e. death, whether intrapartum or in the delivery room or the immediate postpartum period, or neonatal transfer to intensive (or special) care, or trauma, of one or both twins.ResultsWhen we focused on neonatal complications for either or both twins, the strategy of planned vaginal delivery was preferable; the weight of its decision tree branch was lower than that for planned cesarean (26.5 vs. 31.7). If only twin 2 was considered, vaginal delivery was also preferred (weight of vaginal delivery=27.6 vs. 32.7 for planned cesarean). As long as the morbidity and mortality of twin 1 or twin 2 or both during a cesarean for twin 2 in the case of planned vaginal delivery does not exceed 31.5%, all else being equal, vaginal delivery should be preferred to a planned cesarean for twin 1 and twin 2. The two-variable sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the results.ConclusionsThe results of our study do not support a policy of planned cesarean delivery for twin pregnancies at and after 34 weeks of gestation.Level Of EvidenceII.© 2011 The Authors Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica© 2011 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

29 keywords...

hide…