The importance of clinically and ethically fine-tuning decision-making about cesarean delivery

References

[1] Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Mathews TJ. Births: final data for 2014. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2014;64:1–64.Suche in Google Scholar

[2] Kozhimannil KB, Law MR, Virnig BA. Cesarean delivery rates vary tenfold among US hospitals: reducing variation may address quality and cost issues. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:527–35.10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1030Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[3] Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:179–93.10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.026Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[4] Chervenak FA, Mccullough LB, Brent RL. The professional responsibility model of obstetrical ethics: avoiding the perils of clashing rights. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:315.e1–5.10.1016/j.ajog.2011.06.006Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[5] Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. The professional responsibility model of perinatal ethics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter; 2014.10.1515/9783110316728Suche in Google Scholar

[6] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 559: Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121:904–7.10.1097/01.AOG.0000428647.67925.d3Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[7] Omo-aghoja L. Maternal and fetal acid-base chemistry: a major determinant of perinatal outcome. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2014;4:8–17.10.4103/2141-9248.126602Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[8] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 106: Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:192–202.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181aef106Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[9] Clark SL, Nageotte MP, Garite TJ, Freeman RK, Miller DA, Simpson KR, et al. Intrapartum management of category II fetal heart tracings: towards standardization of care. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 209:89–97.10.1097/01.aoa.0000452144.12033.a7Suche in Google Scholar

[10] Parer JT, Ikeda T. A framework for standardized management of intrapartum fetal heart rate patterns. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:26.e1–6.10.1016/j.ajog.2007.03.037Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[11] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 115: Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(2 Pt 1):450–63.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eeb251Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[12] Cahill AG, Stamilio DM, Odibo AO, Peipert JF, Ratcliffe SJ, Stevens EJ, et al. Is vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) or elective repeat cesarean safer in women with a prior vaginal delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195:1143–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.045Suche in Google Scholar

[13] Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, et al. Can a prediction model for vaginal birth after cesarean also predict the probability of morbidity related to a trial of labor? Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:56.e1–56.e6.10.1016/j.ajog.2008.06.039Suche in Google Scholar

[14] Chauhan SP, Martin JN, Henrichs CE, Morrison JC, Magann EF. Maternal and perinatal complications with uterine rupture in 142,075 patients who attempted vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: A review of the literature. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:408–17.10.1067/S0002-9378(03)00675-6Suche in Google Scholar

[15] Guise JM, Hashima J, Osterweil P. Evidence-based vaginal birth after Caesarean section. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;19:117–30.10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2004.10.015Suche in Google Scholar

[16] Leung AS, Farmer RM, Leung EK, Medearis AL, Paul RH. Risk factors associated with uterine rupture during trial of labor after cesarean delivery: a case-control study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;168:1358–63.10.1016/S0002-9378(11)90765-0Suche in Google Scholar

[17] Tahseen S, Griffiths M. Vaginal birth after two caesarean sections (VBAC-2)- a systematic review with meta-analysis of success rate and adverse outcomes of VBAC-2 versus VBAC-1 and repeat (third) caesarean sections. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;117:5–19.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02351.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[18] Cahill AG, Tuuli M, Odibo AO, Stamilio DM, Macones GA. Vaginal birth after caesarean for women with three or more prior cesareans: assessing safety and success. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;117:422–7.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02498.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[19] Cheng YW, Eden KB, Marshall N, Pereira L, Caughey AB, Guise JM. Delivery after prior cesarean: maternal morbidity and mortality. Clin Perinatol. 2011;38:297–309.10.1016/j.clp.2011.03.012Suche in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

[20] Hannah ME, Whyte H, Hannah WJ, Hewson S, Amankwah K, Cheng M, et al. Maternal outcomes at 2 years after planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the international randomized Term Breech Trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:917–27.10.1016/j.ajog.2004.08.004Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[21] Bergenhenegouwen LA, Meertens LJE, Schaaf J, Nijhuis JG, Mol BW, Kok M, et al. Vaginal delivery versus caesarean section in preterm breech delivery: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;172:1–6.10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.10.017Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[22] Wolf H, Schaap AH, Bruinse HW, Smolders-de haas H, Van Ertbruggen I, Treffers PE. Vaginal delivery compared with caesarean section in early preterm breech delivery: a comparison of long term outcome. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;106:486–91.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08303.xSuche in Google Scholar

[23] Anderson G, Strong C. The premature breech: caesarean section or trial of labour?. J Med Ethics. 1988;14:18–24.10.1136/jme.14.1.18Suche in Google Scholar

[24] Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomized multicentre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet. 2000;356:1375–83.10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02840-3Suche in Google Scholar

[25] Whyte H, Hannah ME, Saigal S, Hannah WJ, Hewson S, Amankwah K, et al. Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:864–71.10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.056Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[26] Guiliani A, Scholl WM, Basver A, Tamussino KF. Mode of delivery and outcome of 699 term singleton breech deliveries at a single center. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:1694–8.10.1067/mob.2002.127902Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

[27] Alarab M, Regan C, O’Connell MP, Keane DP, O’Herlihy C, Foley ME. Singleton vaginal breech delivery at term: still a safe option. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:407–12.10.1097/01.AOG.0000113625.29073.4cSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[28] Vidovics M, Jacobs VR, Fischer T, Maier B. Comparison of fetal outcome in premature vaginal or cesarean breech delivery at 24–37 gestational weeks. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;290:271–81.10.1007/s00404-014-3203-ySuche in Google Scholar PubMed

[29] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 340: Mode of term singleton breech delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:235–7.10.1097/00006250-200607000-00058Suche in Google Scholar PubMed