External validation of a prediction model on vaginal birth after caesarean in a The Netherlands: a prospective cohort study
-
Emy Vankan
,
Sander M. J. van Kuijk
Abstract
Objectives
Discussing the individual probability of a successful vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) can support decision making. The aim of this study is to externally validate a prediction model for the probability of a VBAC in a Dutch population.
Methods
In this prospective cohort study in 12 Dutch hospitals, 586 women intending VBAC were included. Inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancies with a cephalic foetal presentation, delivery after 37 weeks and one previous caesarean section (CS) and preference for intending VBAC. The studied prediction model included six predictors: pre-pregnancy body mass index, previous vaginal delivery, previous CS because of non-progressive labour, Caucasian ethnicity, induction of current labour, and estimated foetal weight ≥90th percentile. The discriminative and predictive performance of the model was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and calibration plots.
Results
The area under the curve was 0.73 (CI 0.69–0.78). The average predicted probability of a VBAC according to the prediction model was 70.3% (range 33–92%). The actual VBAC rate was 71.7%. The calibration plot shows some overestimation for low probabilities of VBAC and an underestimation of high probabilities.
Conclusions
The prediction model showed good performance and was externally validated in a Dutch population. Hence it can be implemented as part of counselling for mode of delivery in women choosing between intended VBAC or planned CS after previous CS.
Funding source: The Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw)
Award Identifier / Grant number: 17100.3006
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank all the patients who participated in our study.
-
Research funding: None declared.
-
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.
-
Competing interests: Authors state no conflict of interest.
-
Informed consent: Informed consent was obtained from all individuals included in this study.
-
Ethical approval: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Medical Ethical Committee of the Maastricht University Medical Centre+ (MUMC+) in The Netherlands (MEC number 12-4-091) (18-04-13).
References
1. Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. Birth after previous caesarean birth, 45 Green-Top Guideline; 2015.Suche in Google Scholar
2. ACOG Practice bulletin no. 115. Vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:450–63. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eeb251.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Excellence NIFHAC. Caesarean section. NICE Guidelines; 2011. (November).Suche in Google Scholar
4. Guise, JM, Eden, K, Emeis, C, Denman, MA, Marshall, N, Fu, RR, et al.. Vaginal birth after caesarean: new insights. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 2010;191:1–397. 20629481.Suche in Google Scholar
5. Annessi, E, Del Giovane, C, Magnani, L, Carossino, E, Baldoni, G, Battagliarin, G, et al.. A modified prediction model for VBAC, in a European population. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;29:435–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2014.1002767.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
6. Fagerberg, MC, Marsal, K, Kallen, K. Predicting the chance of vaginal delivery after one caesarean section: validation and elaboration of a published prediction model. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015;188:88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.02.031.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
7. Grobman, WA, Lai, Y, Landon, MB, Spong, CY, Leveno, KJ, Rouse, DJ, et al.. Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:806–12. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000259312.36053.02.Suche in Google Scholar
8. Grobman, WA, Lai, Y, Landon, MB, Spong, CY, Leveno, KJ, Rouse, DJ, et al.. Does information available at admission for delivery improve prediction of vaginal birth after caesarean? Am J Perinatol 2009;26:693–701. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1239494.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
9. Smith, GCS, White, IR, Pell, JP, Dobbie, R. Predicting caesarean section and uterine rupture among women attempting vaginal birth after prior caesarean section. PLoS Med 2005;2:e252. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020252.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
10. Costantine, MM, Fox, KA, Pacheco, LD, Mateus, J, Hankins, GDV, Grobman, WA, et al.. Does information available at delivery improve the accuracy of predicting vaginal birth after caesarean? Validation of the published models in an independent patient cohort. Am J Perinatol 2011;28:293–8. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1271214.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
11. Schoorel, ENC, Melman, S, van Kuijk, SMJ, Grobman, WA, Kwee, A, Mol, BWJ, et al.. Predicting successful intended vaginal delivery after previous caesarean section: external validation of two predictive models in a Dutch nationwide registration-based cohort with a high intended vaginal delivery rate. BJOG 2014;121:840–7. discussion 847. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12605.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
12. Yokoi, A, Ishikawa, K, Miyazaki, K, Yoshida, K, Furuhashi, M, Tamakoshi, K. Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after caesarean delivery in Japanese women. Int J Med Sci 2012;9:488–91. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijms.4682.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
13. Schoorel, ENC, van Kuijk, SMJ, Melman, S, Nijhuis, JG, Smits, LJM, Aardenburg, R, et al.. Vaginal birth after a caesarean section: the development of a Western European population-based prediction model for deliveries at term. BJOG 2014;121:194–201. discussion 201. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12539.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
14. Schoorel, ENC, Vankan, E, Scheepers, HCJ, Augustijn, BCC, Dirksen, CD, de Koning, M, et al.. Involving women in personalised decision-making on mode of delivery after caesarean section: the development and pilot testing of a patient decision aid. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol 2014;121:202–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12516.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
15. Vankan, E, Schoorel, E, van Kuijk, S, Nijhuis, J, Hermens, R, Scheepers, H, et al.. The effect of the use of a decision aid with individual risk estimation on the mode of delivery after a caesarean section: a prospective cohort study. PloS One 2019;14: e0222499. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222499.10.1371/journal.pone.0222499Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
16. Vergouwe, Y, Steyerberg, EW, Eijkemans, MJC, Habbema, JDF. Substantial effective sample sizes were required for external validation studies of predictive logistic regression models. Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:475–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.06.017.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
17. Rippe, RCA, Heijer, DM, Cessie, LS. Imputation of missing data. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2013;157:A5539. 2365501.Suche in Google Scholar
18. Euro-peristat project, European perinatal Health report, core indicators of the health and care of pregnant women and babies in europe in 2015; 2018. Available from: www.europeristat.com.Suche in Google Scholar
19. McMahon, MJ, Luther, ER, Bowes, WAJr, Olshan, AF. Comparison of a trial of labour with an elective second caesarean section. N Engl J Med 1996;335:689–95. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199609053351001.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
20. Grobman, WA, Lai, Y, Landon, MB, Spong, CY, Leveno, KJ, Rouse, DJ, et al.. Can a prediction model for vaginal birth after caesarean also predict the probability of morbidity related to a trial of labour? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:56.e1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2008.06.039.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
21. Chaillet, N, Bujold, E, Dubé, E, Grobman, WA. Validation of a prediction model for predicting the probability of morbidity related to a trial of labour in quebec. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2012;34:820–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1701-2163(16)35379-8.Suche in Google Scholar
22. Metz, TD, Stoddard, GJ, Henry, E, Jackson, M, Holmgren, C, Esplin, S. Simple, validated vaginal birth after caesarean delivery prediction model for use at the time of admission. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:571–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0b013e31829f8ced.Suche in Google Scholar
23. Mone, F, Harrity, C, Mackie, A, Segurado, R, Toner, B, McCormick, TR, et al.. Vaginal birth after caesarean section prediction models: a UK comparative observational study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2015;193:136–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.07.024.Suche in Google Scholar PubMed
Supplementary Material
The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2020-0308).
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Review
- Clinical evaluation of labor: an evidence- and experience-based approach
- Original Articles – Obstetrics
- How fever is defined in COVID-19 publications: a disturbing lack of precision
- Initial review of pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19 infection
- Usefulness of COVID-19 screen-and-test approach in pregnant women: an experience from a country with low COVID-19 burden
- Clinical chorioamnionitis at term X: microbiology, clinical signs, placental pathology, and neonatal bacteremia – implications for clinical care
- Cytokine profiling: variation in immune modulation with preterm birth vs. uncomplicated term birth identifies pivotal signals in pathogenesis of preterm birth
- Hyperechoic amniotic membranes in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes (p-PROM) and pregnancy outcome
- A novel technique for prediction of preterm birth: fetal nasal flow Doppler
- Pregnant women’s knowledge and behaviour to prevent cytomegalovirus infection: an observational study
- Reference intervals and reliability of cavum septi pellucidi volume measurements by three-dimensional ultrasound between 19 and 24 weeks’ gestation
- First-trimester presentation of ultrasound findings in trisomy 13 and validation of multiparameter ultrasound-based risk calculation models to detect trisomy 13 in the late first trimester
- Pre-operative tranexemic acid vs. etamsylate in reducing blood loss during elective cesarean section: randomized controlled trial
- External validation of a prediction model on vaginal birth after caesarean in a The Netherlands: a prospective cohort study
- The influence of race on cervical length in pregnant women in Brazil
- Original Articles – Fetus
- A 24-segment fractional shortening of the fetal heart using FetalHQ
- Original Articles – Neonates
- Antenatal corticosteroids and short-term neonatal outcomes in term and near-term infants of diabetic mothers. Analysis of the Qatar PEARL-peristat registry
- Acute respiratory effect of transpyloric feeding for respiratory exacerbation in preterm infants
- Quality improvement for reducing utilization drift in hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy management
- Letter to the Editor
- Cross transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and obstetric ultrasound
- ‘Getting to zero’ cross transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in obstetric ultrasound during COVID-19 pandemic
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Review
- Clinical evaluation of labor: an evidence- and experience-based approach
- Original Articles – Obstetrics
- How fever is defined in COVID-19 publications: a disturbing lack of precision
- Initial review of pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women with COVID-19 infection
- Usefulness of COVID-19 screen-and-test approach in pregnant women: an experience from a country with low COVID-19 burden
- Clinical chorioamnionitis at term X: microbiology, clinical signs, placental pathology, and neonatal bacteremia – implications for clinical care
- Cytokine profiling: variation in immune modulation with preterm birth vs. uncomplicated term birth identifies pivotal signals in pathogenesis of preterm birth
- Hyperechoic amniotic membranes in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes (p-PROM) and pregnancy outcome
- A novel technique for prediction of preterm birth: fetal nasal flow Doppler
- Pregnant women’s knowledge and behaviour to prevent cytomegalovirus infection: an observational study
- Reference intervals and reliability of cavum septi pellucidi volume measurements by three-dimensional ultrasound between 19 and 24 weeks’ gestation
- First-trimester presentation of ultrasound findings in trisomy 13 and validation of multiparameter ultrasound-based risk calculation models to detect trisomy 13 in the late first trimester
- Pre-operative tranexemic acid vs. etamsylate in reducing blood loss during elective cesarean section: randomized controlled trial
- External validation of a prediction model on vaginal birth after caesarean in a The Netherlands: a prospective cohort study
- The influence of race on cervical length in pregnant women in Brazil
- Original Articles – Fetus
- A 24-segment fractional shortening of the fetal heart using FetalHQ
- Original Articles – Neonates
- Antenatal corticosteroids and short-term neonatal outcomes in term and near-term infants of diabetic mothers. Analysis of the Qatar PEARL-peristat registry
- Acute respiratory effect of transpyloric feeding for respiratory exacerbation in preterm infants
- Quality improvement for reducing utilization drift in hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy management
- Letter to the Editor
- Cross transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and obstetric ultrasound
- ‘Getting to zero’ cross transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in obstetric ultrasound during COVID-19 pandemic
