Vaginal Delivery After External Cephalic Version in Patients With a Previous Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.


Journal

Obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1873-233X
Titre abrégé: Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0401101

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020
Historique:
pubmed: 9 10 2020
medline: 1 12 2020
entrez: 8 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To estimate the rate of vaginal delivery after successful external cephalic version for breech presentation in women with compared with without a previous cesarean birth. We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies comparing the mode of delivery after successful external cephalic version in women with and without a previous cesarean birth. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and evaluated study quality. The rate of vaginal delivery after successful external cephalic version in women with and without a previous cesarean birth was compared, and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were estimated. Six cohort studies and two case-control studies, reporting on 14,515 women were identified. The median point prevalence of a successful external cephalic version was 74% (interquartile range 63-81%) in women with a previous cesarean birth compared with 69% (interquartile range 64-83%) in women without a previous cesarean birth. The overall success rate of external cephalic version in women with a previous cesarean birth was similar compared with women without a previous cesarean birth (pooled OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61-1.15). The median point prevalence of a vaginal delivery was 75% (interquartile range 61-84%) in women with a previous cesarean birth compared with 92% (interquartile range 85-95%) in women without a previous cesarean birth after a successful external cephalic version. The overall success rate of a vaginal delivery in women with a previous cesarean birth was less compared with women without a previous cesarean birth (pooled OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14-0.50). A planned subgroup analysis on studies that included only multiparous women in the control group (parity one or greater) noted the overall success rate of external cephalic version in women with a previous cesarean birth 76% (853/1,123) was lower compared with multiparous women without a previous cesarean birth 84% (9,911/11,855) (pooled OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54-0.89, I 37%). The overall success rate of a vaginal delivery in women with a previous cesarean birth 83% (666/806) was less compared with women without a previous cesarean birth 97% (9,449/9,746) (pooled OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.12-0.39, I 73%). Women with previous cesarean birth have similar rates of successful external cephalic version when compared with women without a cesarean birth. Although the rate of vaginal delivery is lower, the majority of patients have a successful vaginal birth after cesarean. PROSPERO, CRD42020160145.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33030882
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004065
pii: 00006250-202011000-00016
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

965-971

Références

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK, Driscoll AK. Births: final data for 2018. National Vital Statistics Reports. Vol. 68. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2019.
Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2019;133:e110–27.
Flamm BL, Fried MW, Lonky NM, Giles WS. External cephalic version after previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;165:370–2.
Sela HY, Fiegenberg T, Ben-Meir A, Elchalal U, Ezra Y. Safety and efficacy of external cephalic version for women with a previous cesarean delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;142:111–4.
Impey ORE, Greenwood CEL, Impey LWM. External cephalic version after previous cesarean section: a cohort study of 100 consecutive attempts. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018;231:210–3.
Keepanasseril A, Keerthana A, Raghavan SS. Matched cohort study of external cephalic version in women with previous cesarean delivery. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2017;138:79–83.
Weill Y, Pollack RN. The efficacy and safety of external cephalic version after a previous caesarean delivery. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2017;57:323–6.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, Olkin I, Williamson GD, Rennie D, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000;283:2008–12.
McLaren RA, Atallah F, Fisher N, Minkoff H. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after attempted external cephalic version among women with one previous cesarean delivery. Am J Perinatol Rep 2018;8:e349–54.
Abenhaim HA, Varin J, Boucher M. External cephalic version among women with a previous cesarean delivery: report on 36 cases and review of the literature. J Perinat Med 2009;37:156–60.
Burgos J, Cobos P, Rodriguez L, Osuna C, Centeno MM, et al. Is external cephalic version at term contraindicated in previous caesarean section? A prospective comparative cohort study. BJOG 2014;121:230–5.
Wells GA, Shea G, O'Connell D. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysis. Available at: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Retrieved December 15, 2019.
Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74.
Lo CK, Mertz D, Loeb M. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: comparing reviewers' to authors' assessments. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014;14:45.
Greenland S, Robins JM. Estimation of a common effect parameter from sparse follow-up data. Biometrics 1985;41:55–68.
DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177–88.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a metaanalysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539–58.
Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629–34.
Peters JL, Sutton AJ, Jones DR, Abrams KR, Rushton L. Comparison of two methods to detect publication bias in meta-analysis. JAMA 2006;295:676–80.
Schachter M, Kogan S, Blickstein I. External cephalic version after previous cesarean section – a clinical dilemma. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1994;45:17–20.
De-Meeus JB, Ellia F, Magnin G. External cephalic version after previous cesarean section: a series of 38 cases. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1998;81:65–8.
Regalia AL, Curiel P, Natale N, Galluzzi A, Spinelli G, Ghezzi GV, et al. Routine use of external cephalic version in three hospitals. Birth 2000;27:19–24.
Weiniger CF, Lyell DJ, Tsen LC, Butwick AJ, Shachar B, et al. Maternal outcomes of term breech presentation delivery: impact of successful external cephalic version in a nationwide sample of delivery admissions in the United States. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2016;16:150.
Son M, Roy A, Grobman WA, Miller ES. Association between attempted external cephalic version and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Obstet Gynecol 2018;132:365–70.
Grootscholten K, Kok M, Oei SG, Mol BWJ, van der Post JA. External-cephalic version-related risks: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:1143–51.

Auteurs

Mona Homafar (M)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH