Is It Safer to Have Another Cesarean or Attempt a Vaginal Birth (VBAC)?

And the evidence in favor of vaginal birth over repeated cesareans just keeps piling up!
Check out this most recent study, just published in the journal of
Obstetrics & Gynecology
(2008;111:285- 291).

The study's OBJECTIVE:
To estimate the success rates and risks of anattempted vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC) according to the number of prior successful VBACs.

METHODS:

From a prospective multicenter registry collected at 19 clinical
centers from 1999 to 2002, we selected women with one or more prior low
transverse cesarean deliveries who attempted a VBAC in the current
pregnancy. Outcomes were compared according to the number of prior VBAC
attempts subsequent to the last cesarean delivery.

RESULTS:

Among 13,532 women meeting eligibility criteria, VBAC success
increased with increasing number of prior VBACs: 63.3%, 87.6%, 90.9%, 90.6%,
and 91.6% for those with 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 or more prior VBACs, respectively
(P<.001).

The rate of uterine rupture decreased after the first successful VBAC and did not increase thereafter: 0.87%, 0.45%, 0.38%, 0.54%, 0.52%(P=.03) .

The risk of uterine dehiscence and other peripartum complications also declined statistically after the first successful VBAC. No increase in neonatal morbidities was seen with increasing VBAC number thereafter.

CONCLUSION:

Women with prior successful VBAC attempts are at low risk for maternal and neonatal complications during subsequent VBAC attempts. An increasing number of prior VBACs is associated with a greater probability of VBAC success, as well as a lower risk of uterine rupture and perinatal complications in the current pregnancy. Contrast that study with another from Obstetrics & Gynecology (2006;107:1226- 1232) which found that there is maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesareans.

OBJECTIVE:

To estimate the magnitude of increased maternal morbidity associated with increasing number of cesarean deliveries.

METHODS:

Prospective observational cohort of 30,132 women who had cesarean delivery without labor in 19 academic centers over 4 years (1999-2002). RESULTS: There were 6,201 first (primary), 15,808 second, 6,324 third, 1,452 fourth, 258 fifth, and 89 sixth or more cesarean deliveries. The risks of placenta accreta, cystotomy, bowel injury, ureteral injury, and ileus, the need for postoperative ventilation, intensive care unit admission, hysterectomy, and blood transfusion requiring 4 or more units, and the duration of operative time and hospital stay *significantly increased *with increasing number of cesarean deliveries. Placenta accreta was present in 15 (0.24%), 49 (0.31%), 36 (0.57%), 31 (2.13%), 6 (2.33%), and 6 (6.74%) women undergoing their first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth or more cesarean deliveries, respectively. Hysterectomy was required in 40 (0.65%) first, 67 (0.42%) second, 57 (0.90%) third, 35 (2.41%) fourth, 9 (3.49%) fifth, and 8 (8.99%) sixth or more cesarean deliveries. In the 723 women with previa, the risk for placenta accreta was 3%, 11%, 40%, 61%, and 67% for first, second, third, fourth, and fifth or more repeat cesarean deliveries, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

Because serious maternal morbidity increases progressively with increasing number of cesarean deliveries, the number of intended pregnancies should be considered during counseling regarding elective repeat cesarean operation versus a trial of labor and when debating the merits of elective primary cesarean delivery.