FIND THE FREQUENCY OF UTERINE RUPTURE IN VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN SECTION (VBAC) AND COMPARE RATES BETWEEN SHORT AND LONG INTERPREGNANCY INTERVALS

A NAZAR; T AZIZ; A ASHFAQ; S NOSHEEN; AU KHAN; QU AIN

doi:10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.832

Authors

A NAZAR Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Insaaf Medical Complex, Karachi, Pakistan
T AZIZ Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Al-Yamama Hospital, Riyadh Second Health Cluster, KSA
A ASHFAQ Aziz Fatima Medical and Dental College, Faisalabad, Pakistan
S NOSHEEN Institute of Microbiology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan
AU KHAN University of Science and Technology Bannu, Pakistan
QU AIN Institute of Microbiology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v2024i1.832

Keywords:

Uterine Rupture, Inter Pregnancy Interval, VBAC

Abstract

Vaginal births after cesarean (VBAC) is not typical and uterine rupture, the most serious complication of a TOL after Cesarean, is characterized as the complete separation of the myometrium regardless of extrusion of the fetal parts into the maternal peritoneal cavity. Objective: To determine the frequency of uterine rupture in women who attempt vaginal birth after cesarean section and to compare the frequency of uterine rupture in women with short and long inter-pregnancy intervals. Methods: This Descriptive Case Series was conducted from December 23, 2015, to June 22, 2016. Ninety (90) patients were recruited based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Women were then divided into two groups in short and long interpregnancy intervals per the operational definition. The outcome variable, i.e., uterine rupture, was noted as per the operational definition during the delivery. Results: A total of 90 women were included in this study. The age of the women ranged from 18-40 years. The average age of the women was 28.49 + 4.49, with a mean gestational age of 36.45 + 2.24, mean height of 161.94 + 7.62, mean weight of 67.73 + 11.9, and mean BMI of 25.7 + 4.05. The mean inter-pregnancy interval in women who attempted VBAC was 34.8 + 9.73. 70(78%) had 2-4 parity and 20(22%) had parity >4. 58(64.4%) had long inter pregnancy interval and 32(35.6%) had short pregnancy interval. (Table no: 11) Conclusion: The data indicate that the relative risk of uterine rupture is increased in women undergoing a TOL after Caesarean. Short pregnancy interval increases the risk for uterine rupture two-fold to three-fold in VBAC Women.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Stamilio DM, DeFranco E, Paré E, Odibo AO, Peipert JF, Allsworth JE, et al. Short interpregnancy interval: risk of uterine rupture and complications of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Nov;110(5):1075-82.

Purisch SE, DeFranco EA, Muglia LJ, Odibo AO, Stamilio DM. Preterm birth in pregnancies complicated by major congenital malformations: a population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Sep;199(3):287-88.

DeFranco EA, Ehrlich S, Muglia LJ. Influence of interpregnancy interval on birth timing. BJOG. 2014 Dec;121(13):1633-40.

Rossi AC, Addario VD. Maternal morbidity following a trial of labour after cesarean section vs elective repeat cesarean delivery: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(3):224-31.

Shipp TD, Zelop CM, Repke JT, Cohen A, Lieberman E. Interdelivery interval and risk of symptomatic uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(2):175-7.

Kwee A, Bots ML, Visser GH, Bruinse HW. Obstetric management and outcome of pregnancy in women with a history of caesarean section in the Netherlands. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007;132(2):171–76.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 54: vaginal birth after previous cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104:203–12.

Greene M. Vaginal delivery after cesarean section—Is the risk acceptable? N Engl J Med 2001;345:54–55.

Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Leindecker S, Varner MW, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2581–89.

Kathryn E. Fitzpatrick, Jennifer J. Kurinczuk, Zarko Alfirevic, Patsy Spark, et al. Uterine Rupture by Intended Mode of Delivery in the UK: A National Case-Control Study. PLOS Med. 2012;9(3): e1001184. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001184.

Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Leindecker S, Varner MW, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2004;351(25):2581-9.

Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, Hauth JC, Bloom SL, Varner MW, et al. Risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor in women with multiple and single prior cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108(1):12-20.

MacDorman MF, Declercq E, Menacker F, Malloy MH. Infant and neonatal mortality for primary cesarean and vaginal births to women with "no indicated risk," United States, 1998-2001 birth cohorts. Birth 2006;33(3):175-82.

Macones GA, Peipert J, Nelson DB, Odibo A, Stevens EJ, Stamilio DM, et al. Maternal complications with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193(5):1656-62.

Martel MJ, MacKinnon CJ, Clinical Practice Obstetrics Committee. Guidelines for vaginal birth after previous caesarean birth [SOGC clinical practice guideline no 155]. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 2005;27(2):164-74. Available: http://sogc.org/guidelines/public/155E-CPG-February2005.pdf.

McMahon MJ, Luther ER, Bowes WA, Jr., Olshan AF. Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med 1996;335(10):689-95.

Miller DA, Diaz FG, Paul RH. Vaginal birth after cesarean: a 10-year experience. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;84(2):255-8.

Mozurkewich EL, Hutton EK. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;183(5):1187-97.

Wen SW, Rusen ID, Walker M, Liston R, Kramer MS, Baskett T, et al. Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191(4):1263-9.

Zweifler J, Garza A, Hughes S, Stanich MA, Hierholzer A, Lau M. Vaginal birth after cesarean in California: before and after a change in guidelines. Ann Fam Med 2006;4(3):228-34.

Obstetrical hemorrhage. In: Cunningham FG, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap L, Bloom SL, Wenstrom KD, editors. Williams obstetrics. 22nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical Publishing Division; 2005.Prior Cesarean delivery. In: Cunningham FG, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap L, Bloom SL, Wenstrom KD, editors. Williams obstetrics. 22nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical Publishing Division; 2005.

Flamm BL, Newman LA, Thomas ST, Fallon D, Yoshida MM. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: Results of a 5-year multicenter collaborative study. Obstet Gynecol 1990;76:750 -4.

Rosen MG, Dickinson JC, Westhoff CL. Vaginal birth after cesarean: A meta-analysis of morbidity and mortality. Obstet Gynecol 1991;77:465-70.

Flamm BL, Goings JR, Liu Y, Wolde-Tsadik G. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: A prospective multicenter study. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:927-32.

Miller DA, Diaz FG, Paul RH. Vaginal birth after cesarean: A 10-year experience. Obstet Gynecol.1994;84:255-8.