Induction of Labor with PGE2 after One Previous Cesarean Section: 18 Years Experience in a University Hospital

Nourah Al Qahtani, Sameera Al Borshaid, Hissa Al Enezi

.

DOI: 10.4236/ijcm.2011.21008                

Abstract

Objective: To review the outcome of prostaglandin induction of labor in term pregnant women with previous one ce-sarean section compared to those without previous Cesarean section. Design: 18 years retrospective review of hospital records and case note review of index cases. Setting: University hospital. Population: Three hundred and twenty two women who had their labor induced with prostaglandin E2. One hundred and sixty one women had one previous Ce-sarean section. Methods: This study was conducted at King Fahad University Hospital, University of Dammam. It is a tertiary referral center with approximately 2300 births per year. We searched the hospital's records of deliveries from January 1992 to December 2009 and reviewed all indications and outcomes of prostaglandin induction of labor in women with one previous Cesarean section. The control group was composed of women who had their labor induced with prostaglandin but without previous Cesarean section. Main outcome measures: Labor outcome and uterine rup-ture Results: Three hundred and twenty two women were included. All received prostaglandin E2 for induction of labor. One hundred and sixty one women had one previous Cesarean section (study group) and the rest had no previous Ce-sarean section (control group). There was no difference in the rate of vaginal delivery between study and control group, 68.3% and 79.5% (p value 0.3), respectively. The rate of uterine rupture was 30 times higher in study group (2.5% Vs 0.033%). Conclusion: In women with one previous Cesarean section, induction of labor with prostaglandin leads to comparable rate of vaginal delivery similar to those without prior Cesarean section but with relatively high risk of uter-ine rupture.

Keywords

Prostaglandin, Induction of Labor, Previous Cesarean Section, Retrospective

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	J. Guise, M. Berlin, M. McDonagh, P. Oserweil, B. Chan and M. Helfand, “Safety of Vaginal Birth after Cesarean: A Systemic Review,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 103, No. 3, 2004, pp. 420-429. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000116259.41678.f1
[2]	B. E. Hamilton, J. A. Martin and S. J. Ventura, “Birth: Preliminary Data for 2007,” National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 57, No. 12, 18 March 2009, pp. 1-23.
[3]	G. Goumalatsos and R. Varma, “Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Section: A Practical Evidence-Based Approach,” Obstetrics Gynecology & reproductive medicine, Vol. 19, No. 7, 2009, pp. 178-186.
[4]	F. Althabe and J. F. Belizan, “Caesarean Section: The Paradox,” The Lancet, Vol. 368, 2006, pp. 1472-1473. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69616-5
[5]	“Central Department of Statistics and Information,” Census 2004. http://www.cdsi.gov.sa/pdf/sharqiyah.pdf
[6]	F. W. Makoha, H. M. Felimban, M. A. Fathuddien, F. Roomi and T. Ghabra, “Multiple Cesarean Section Morbidity,” International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, Vol. 87, No. 3, 2004, pp. 227-232. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2004.08.016
[7]	M. G. Rosen, J. C. Dickinson and C. L. Westhoff, “Vaginal Birth after Cesarean: A Meta-Analysis of Morbidity and Mortality,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 77, No. 3, March 1991, pp. 465-470.
[8]	R. M. Silver, M. B. Landon, D. J. Rouse, K. J. Leveno, C. Y. Sponge, E. A. Thom, et al., “Maternal Morbidity Associated with Multiple Repeat Cesarean Deliveries,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, Vol. 107, No. 6, 2006, pp. 1226-1232. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.84
[9]	S. I. Kayani and Z. Alfirevic, “Uterine rupture after induction of labour in women with previous caesarean section,” British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 112, No. 12, 2005, pp. 451-455.
[10]	M. J. A. Turner, G. Angew and H. Langan, “Uterine Rupture and Labour after a Previous Low,” Transverse Cesarean Section, British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 113, No. 11, 2006, pp. 729-732.
[11]	G. Angew and M. J. Turner, “Vaginal Prostaglandin Gel to Induce Labour in Women with One Previous Caesarean Section,” Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 29, No. 3, 2009, pp. 209-211. doi:10.1080/01443610902743789
[12]	J. Dodd and C. Crowther, “Vaginal Birth after Cesrean versus Elective Repeat Cesarean for Women with a Single Prior Cesarean Birth: Asystemic Review of the Literature,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 44, 2004, pp. 387-391. doi:10.1111/j.1479-828X.2004.00257.x
[13]	W. F. Rayburn, L. N. Gittens, M. J. Lucas, S. A. Gall and M. E. Martin, “Weekly Administration of Prostaglandin E2 Gel Compared with Expectant Management in Women with Previous Cesareans,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 94, No. 2, 1999, pp. 250-254. doi:10.1016/S0029-7844(99)00300-2
[14]	O. M. McNally and M. J. Turner, “Induction of Labor after 1 previous Cesarean Section,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 39, No. 4, 1999, pp. 425-429. doi:10.1111/j.1479-828X.1999.tb03126.x
[15]	A. C. Rossi and V. D’Addario, “Maternal Morbidity Following a Trial of Labor after Cesarean Section vs Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery: A Systemic Review with Metaanalysis,” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 199, No. 3, 2008, pp. 224-231. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.04.025
[16]	A. G. Cahill, D. M. Stamilio, A. O. Odibo, J. F. Peipert, E. J. Stevens and G. A. Macones, “Does a Maximum Dose of Oxytocin Affect Risk of Uterine Rupture in Candidates for Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Delivery?” American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 197, No. 495, 2007, pp. e1-e5.
[17]	M. Kaczmarczyk, P. Sparen, P. Terry and S. Cnattingius, “Risk Factors for Uterine Rupture and Neonatal Consequences of Uterine Rupture: A Population-Based Study of Successive Pregnancies in Sweden,” British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 114, No. 10, 2007, pp. 1208-1214. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01484.x
[18]	G. J. Hofmeyr, L. Say and A. M. Gulmezoglu, “WHO Systemic Review of Maternal Mortality and Morbidity: The Prevalence of Uterine Rupture,” British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 112, No. 9, 2005, pp. 1221-1228. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00725.x
[19]	ACOG Committee Opinion No. 271, “Induction of Labor for Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Delivery,” Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 99, 2002, pp. 679-680.
[20]	M. S. McDonagh, P. Osterweil and J.-M. Guise, “The Benefits and Risks of Inducing Labour in Patients with Prior Caesarean Delivery: A Systemic Review,” British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 112, No. 8, 2005, pp. 1007-1015. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00623.x
[21]	I. Al-Zirqi, B. Stray-Pedersen, L. Forsen and S. Vangen, “Uterine Rupture after Previous Cesarean Section,” British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Vol. 117, No. 11, 2010, pp. 809-820.