简化剖宫产后阴道分娩的预测:宫颈检查的作用。

Megan C Oakes, Drew M Hensel, Jeannie C Kelly, Roxane Rampersad, Ebony B Carter, Alison G Cahill, Nandini Raghuraman
{"title":"简化剖宫产后阴道分娩的预测:宫颈检查的作用。","authors":"Megan C Oakes,&nbsp;Drew M Hensel,&nbsp;Jeannie C Kelly,&nbsp;Roxane Rampersad,&nbsp;Ebony B Carter,&nbsp;Alison G Cahill,&nbsp;Nandini Raghuraman","doi":"10.1080/14767058.2022.2086795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Predicting likelihood of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) is a cornerstone in counseling patients considering a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). Yet, the simplified Bishop score (SBS), a score comprised cervical dilation, station, and effacement assessment used to predict successful vaginal delivery, has not been applied to the TOLAC population. We evaluated the relationship between admission SBS and likelihood of successful VBAC. We also determined the predictive characteristics of SBS, compared to cervical dilation alone, for successful VBAC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of patients with a singleton gestation, ≥37 0/7 weeks gestation, and prior cesarean admitted to Labor & Delivery between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome of successful VBAC was compared between those with a favorable (score >5) and unfavorable (score ≤5) admission SBS. Secondary outcomes were select maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Receiver-operating characteristic curves compared predictive capabilities of cervical dilation alone to SBS for successful VBAC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 656 patients who underwent a TOLAC during the study period, 421 (64%) had a successful VBAC. 203 (31%) and 453 (69%) had a favorable and an unfavorable admission SBS, respectively. After adjusting for body mass index and prior vaginal delivery, patients with a favorable admission SBS had a 30% greater likelihood of successful VBAC compared to those with an unfavorable SBS (aRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.40). Admission cervical dilation alone performed similarly to SBS as a predictor of successful VBAC, with a receiver-operator characteristic curve area under the curve (AUC) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.64-0.72) versus an AUC 0.66 (95% CI 0.62-0.70), respectively (<i>p</i> = .07). There were no differences in adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes between those with an unfavorable and favorable SBS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A favorable admission SBS is associated with an increased likelihood of VBAC. Although both admission SBS and cervical dilation alone are only modest predictors of VBAC, admission cervical dilation performs overall similarly to current models for VBAC prediction and is an objective, reproducible, and generalizable measure. Our study highlights the value of waiting until end of pregnancy (rather than the first prenatal visit) to conclude patient counseling on the decision to TOLAC in order to consider admission cervical assessment, particularly cervical dilation.</p>","PeriodicalId":520807,"journal":{"name":"The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians","volume":" ","pages":"10030-10035"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Simplifying the prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: role of the cervical exam.\",\"authors\":\"Megan C Oakes,&nbsp;Drew M Hensel,&nbsp;Jeannie C Kelly,&nbsp;Roxane Rampersad,&nbsp;Ebony B Carter,&nbsp;Alison G Cahill,&nbsp;Nandini Raghuraman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14767058.2022.2086795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Predicting likelihood of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) is a cornerstone in counseling patients considering a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). Yet, the simplified Bishop score (SBS), a score comprised cervical dilation, station, and effacement assessment used to predict successful vaginal delivery, has not been applied to the TOLAC population. We evaluated the relationship between admission SBS and likelihood of successful VBAC. We also determined the predictive characteristics of SBS, compared to cervical dilation alone, for successful VBAC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of patients with a singleton gestation, ≥37 0/7 weeks gestation, and prior cesarean admitted to Labor & Delivery between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome of successful VBAC was compared between those with a favorable (score >5) and unfavorable (score ≤5) admission SBS. Secondary outcomes were select maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Receiver-operating characteristic curves compared predictive capabilities of cervical dilation alone to SBS for successful VBAC.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 656 patients who underwent a TOLAC during the study period, 421 (64%) had a successful VBAC. 203 (31%) and 453 (69%) had a favorable and an unfavorable admission SBS, respectively. After adjusting for body mass index and prior vaginal delivery, patients with a favorable admission SBS had a 30% greater likelihood of successful VBAC compared to those with an unfavorable SBS (aRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.40). Admission cervical dilation alone performed similarly to SBS as a predictor of successful VBAC, with a receiver-operator characteristic curve area under the curve (AUC) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.64-0.72) versus an AUC 0.66 (95% CI 0.62-0.70), respectively (<i>p</i> = .07). There were no differences in adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes between those with an unfavorable and favorable SBS.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A favorable admission SBS is associated with an increased likelihood of VBAC. Although both admission SBS and cervical dilation alone are only modest predictors of VBAC, admission cervical dilation performs overall similarly to current models for VBAC prediction and is an objective, reproducible, and generalizable measure. Our study highlights the value of waiting until end of pregnancy (rather than the first prenatal visit) to conclude patient counseling on the decision to TOLAC in order to consider admission cervical assessment, particularly cervical dilation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520807,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10030-10035\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2022.2086795\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/6/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2022.2086795","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:预测剖宫产后阴道分娩的可能性(VBAC)是为考虑剖宫产后试产(TOLAC)的患者提供咨询的基础。然而,简化Bishop评分(SBS),一种包括宫颈扩张、宫颈位置和宫颈消退评估的评分,用于预测阴道分娩的成功,尚未应用于TOLAC人群。我们评估了入院SBS与VBAC成功可能性之间的关系。我们还确定了SBS的预测特征,与单独宫颈扩张相比,成功的VBAC。方法:这是一项前瞻性队列研究的二次分析,该研究纳入了2010年至2014年期间在Labor & Delivery住院的单胎妊娠、≥37 0/7周妊娠和既往剖宫产的患者。VBAC成功的主要结局比较了入院SBS良好(评分>5)和不良(评分≤5)两组患者。次要结局是选定的产妇和新生儿结局。调整后的风险比采用多变量logistic回归分析估计。接受者工作特征曲线比较单独宫颈扩张与SBS对VBAC成功的预测能力。结果:在研究期间接受TOLAC的656例患者中,421例(64%)成功进行了VBAC。对SBS持赞成态度的有203人(31%),持反对态度的有453人(69%)。在调整体重指数和既往阴道分娩后,与不良SBS患者相比,良好SBS患者成功VBAC的可能性高出30% (aRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.40)。单独宫颈扩张作为VBAC成功的预测指标与SBS相似,接受者-操作者特征曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.68 (95% CI 0.64-0.72)和0.66 (95% CI 0.62-0.70) (p = 0.07)。不良的产妇或新生儿结局在不利的和有利的SBS之间没有差异。结论:良好的入院SBS与VBAC的可能性增加有关。虽然入院时SBS和宫颈扩张仅是VBAC的适度预测因子,但入院时宫颈扩张的总体表现与目前预测VBAC的模型相似,是一种客观、可重复和可推广的测量方法。我们的研究强调了等到怀孕结束(而不是第一次产前检查)才结束患者对TOLAC决定的咨询的价值,以便考虑入院宫颈评估,特别是宫颈扩张。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Simplifying the prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: role of the cervical exam.

Objective: Predicting likelihood of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) is a cornerstone in counseling patients considering a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). Yet, the simplified Bishop score (SBS), a score comprised cervical dilation, station, and effacement assessment used to predict successful vaginal delivery, has not been applied to the TOLAC population. We evaluated the relationship between admission SBS and likelihood of successful VBAC. We also determined the predictive characteristics of SBS, compared to cervical dilation alone, for successful VBAC.

Methods: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of patients with a singleton gestation, ≥37 0/7 weeks gestation, and prior cesarean admitted to Labor & Delivery between 2010 and 2014. The primary outcome of successful VBAC was compared between those with a favorable (score >5) and unfavorable (score ≤5) admission SBS. Secondary outcomes were select maternal and neonatal outcomes. Adjusted risk ratios were estimated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Receiver-operating characteristic curves compared predictive capabilities of cervical dilation alone to SBS for successful VBAC.

Results: Of the 656 patients who underwent a TOLAC during the study period, 421 (64%) had a successful VBAC. 203 (31%) and 453 (69%) had a favorable and an unfavorable admission SBS, respectively. After adjusting for body mass index and prior vaginal delivery, patients with a favorable admission SBS had a 30% greater likelihood of successful VBAC compared to those with an unfavorable SBS (aRR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.40). Admission cervical dilation alone performed similarly to SBS as a predictor of successful VBAC, with a receiver-operator characteristic curve area under the curve (AUC) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.64-0.72) versus an AUC 0.66 (95% CI 0.62-0.70), respectively (p = .07). There were no differences in adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes between those with an unfavorable and favorable SBS.

Conclusions: A favorable admission SBS is associated with an increased likelihood of VBAC. Although both admission SBS and cervical dilation alone are only modest predictors of VBAC, admission cervical dilation performs overall similarly to current models for VBAC prediction and is an objective, reproducible, and generalizable measure. Our study highlights the value of waiting until end of pregnancy (rather than the first prenatal visit) to conclude patient counseling on the decision to TOLAC in order to consider admission cervical assessment, particularly cervical dilation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信