Vaginal breech delivery in all-fours position-Hands off instead of intervention: A prospective observational study.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Gerhard Bogner, Johanna Schuller, Carina Gargitter, Eva Dölzlmüller, Thorsten Fischer, Claudius Fazelnia
{"title":"Vaginal breech delivery in all-fours position-Hands off instead of intervention: A prospective observational study.","authors":"Gerhard Bogner, Johanna Schuller, Carina Gargitter, Eva Dölzlmüller, Thorsten Fischer, Claudius Fazelnia","doi":"10.1111/aogs.15078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Vaginal delivery in cases of breech presentation is considered potentially stressful for the newborn. The maternal upright position may represent a more physiological approach to facilitating birth. We compare the safety and efficacy of two maternal positions in vaginal breech delivery.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A prospective, single-center, observational cohort study from October 2006 to January 2021 in a high-level obstetric center, in Salzburg, Austria. Vaginal breech deliveries in maternal all-fours position (n = 140) were compared with those in assisted supine position (n = 92). The primary outcome measures for neonatal morbidity included Apgar scores, pH levels, and the rate of transfer to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) postdelivery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the all-fours position, 51.4% (n = 72) of deliveries occurred without obstetric intervention. The second stage of labor was significantly shorter in the supine position (39.5 min [95% CI 28-47] versus all fours position 52 min [95% CI 42-63], p = 0.042). Umbilical artery pH levels did not differ significantly (7.21 [95% CI 7.19-7.23] versus 7.19 [95% CI 7.17-7.21] vs. p = 0.06). Nor did the APGAR scores at 5 and 10 min below eight (p = 0.697; p = 0.760). Maternal and neonatal morbidity also did not significantly differ. Transfer of neonates to NICU n = 12 (13%) versus n = 11 (7.9%), p = 0.097, transfer birth-related n = 6 (6.5%) versus n = 8 (5.7%), p = 0.803. The number of postpartum umbilical artery pH < 7.10 were n = 9 (9.8%) versus n = 28 (20%), p = 0.065. There was one reported neonatal death due to intracerebral hemorrhage in the supine position group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results indicate that vaginal breech delivery in the all-fours position seems to be comparable to supine position regarding neonatal safety. Additionally, the all-fours position shows potential for emergency management for unplanned breech deliveries by inexperienced attendants.</p>","PeriodicalId":6990,"journal":{"name":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.15078","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Vaginal delivery in cases of breech presentation is considered potentially stressful for the newborn. The maternal upright position may represent a more physiological approach to facilitating birth. We compare the safety and efficacy of two maternal positions in vaginal breech delivery.

Material and methods: A prospective, single-center, observational cohort study from October 2006 to January 2021 in a high-level obstetric center, in Salzburg, Austria. Vaginal breech deliveries in maternal all-fours position (n = 140) were compared with those in assisted supine position (n = 92). The primary outcome measures for neonatal morbidity included Apgar scores, pH levels, and the rate of transfer to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) postdelivery.

Results: In the all-fours position, 51.4% (n = 72) of deliveries occurred without obstetric intervention. The second stage of labor was significantly shorter in the supine position (39.5 min [95% CI 28-47] versus all fours position 52 min [95% CI 42-63], p = 0.042). Umbilical artery pH levels did not differ significantly (7.21 [95% CI 7.19-7.23] versus 7.19 [95% CI 7.17-7.21] vs. p = 0.06). Nor did the APGAR scores at 5 and 10 min below eight (p = 0.697; p = 0.760). Maternal and neonatal morbidity also did not significantly differ. Transfer of neonates to NICU n = 12 (13%) versus n = 11 (7.9%), p = 0.097, transfer birth-related n = 6 (6.5%) versus n = 8 (5.7%), p = 0.803. The number of postpartum umbilical artery pH < 7.10 were n = 9 (9.8%) versus n = 28 (20%), p = 0.065. There was one reported neonatal death due to intracerebral hemorrhage in the supine position group.

Conclusions: Our results indicate that vaginal breech delivery in the all-fours position seems to be comparable to supine position regarding neonatal safety. Additionally, the all-fours position shows potential for emergency management for unplanned breech deliveries by inexperienced attendants.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
180
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Published monthly, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica is an international journal dedicated to providing the very latest information on the results of both clinical, basic and translational research work related to all aspects of women’s health from around the globe. The journal regularly publishes commentaries, reviews, and original articles on a wide variety of topics including: gynecology, pregnancy, birth, female urology, gynecologic oncology, fertility and reproductive biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信