Startseite Examining the validity of a predictive model for vaginal birth after cesarean
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Examining the validity of a predictive model for vaginal birth after cesarean

  • Jennifer W.H. Wong EMAIL logo , Kurt D.N. Yoshino , Hyeong Jun Ahn , So Yung Choi und Ann L. Chang
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 14. November 2019

Abstract

Background

The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator, while accurate for candidates with high predicted success rates, is not as accurate for poor candidates. This study examines the calculator’s validity in an understudied multiracial cohort with a high proportion of poor candidates.

Methods

This retrospective study examined women with one or two prior cesarean deliveries who attempted VBAC at a single institution. Subjects were placed into quartiles based on MFMU-predicted success rates. For each quartile, actual and predicted success rates were compared. The calculated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was compared to the original AUC.

Results

The study included 1604 women. Actual and predicted VBAC rates were similar in the lowest and highest quartile groups, 18.2% vs. 21.2% (n = 11, P > 0.99) and 87.1% vs. 88.5% (n = 1090, P = 0.14), respectively. In the 51–75% predicted success rate group, the actual VBAC rate was higher than the predicted rate, 69.9% vs. 65.5% (n = 394) but not statistically significant (P = 0.07). In the 25–50% predicted success rate group, the actual VBAC rate was significantly higher than the predicted rate 55.1% vs. 39.6% (n = 109, P = 0.002). The actual AUC was lower than the MFMU model, 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69–0.75] vs. 0.77 (95% CI 0.76–0.78) (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The MFMU VBAC calculator’s predicted success rates were comparable to actual success rates for candidates with predicted success rates >75%. As predicted success rates declined, the calculator was increasingly inaccurate and underestimated the success rate. Caution should be taken when using the MFMU VBAC calculator for poor candidates.


Corresponding author: Jennifer W.H. Wong, MD, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Women’s Health, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii, 1319 Punahou Street, Suite #824, Honolulu, HI 96826, USA, Tel.: +(808) 203-6532, Fax:  +(808) 955-2174

Award Identifier / Grant number: U54MD007601

Award Identifier / Grant number: U54MD007584

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2U54GM104944

Funding statement: This study was funded by the Lakshmi Devi and Devraj Sharma Endowment. Dr. Hyeong Jun Ahn and Ms. So Yung Choi were partially supported by the National Institutes of Health under Funder Id: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000002, grants U54MD007601, U54MD007584, and 2U54GM104944.

  1. Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.

  2. Employment or leadership: None declared.

  3. Honorarium: None declared.

  4. Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of the National Institutes of Health.

References

1. Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ, Driscoll AK, Rossen LM. Births: provisional data for 2016. Vital Statistics Rapid Release No. 2. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2017.Suche in Google Scholar

2. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. ACOG Practice Bulletin Number 205, February 2019.Suche in Google Scholar

3. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, et al. Development of a Nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:806–12.10.1097/01.AOG.0000259312.36053.02Suche in Google Scholar

4. 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 cesarean? Am J Perinatol 2009;26:693–701.10.1055/s-0029-1239494Suche in Google Scholar

5. Yokoi A, Ishikawa K, Miyazaki K, Yoshida K, Furuhashi M, Tamakoshi K. Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in Japanese women. Int J Med Sci 2012;9:488–91.10.7150/ijms.4682Suche in Google Scholar

6. Schoorel EN, Melman S, van Kuijk SM, Grobman WA, Kwee A, Mol BW, et al. Predicting successful intended vaginal delivery after previous cesarean section: external validation of two predictive models in a Dutch nationwide registration-based cohort with a high intended vaginal delivery rate. BJOG 2014;121: 840–7.10.1097/01.aoa.0000463832.23929.4aSuche in Google Scholar

7. Maykin MM, Mularz AJ, Lee LK, Valderramos SG. Validation of a prediction model for vaginal birth after cesarean delivery reveals unexpected success in diverse American population. Am J Perinatol Rep 2017;7:e31–8.10.1055/s-0037-1599129Suche in Google Scholar

8. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Panel. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development conference statement: vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights March 8–10, 2–10. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:1279–95.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e459e5Suche in Google Scholar PubMed

9. Markey O. Worldwide trends in body-mass index, underweight, overweight, and obesity from 1975 to 2016: a pool analysis of 2416 population-based measurement studies in 128.9 children, adolescent, and adults. Lancet 2017;390:16–22.Suche in Google Scholar

10. Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M, Thomson B, Graetz N, Margono C, et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 2013;384:766–81.10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60460-8Suche in Google Scholar

11. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Panel. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development conference statement: vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:1279–95.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e459e5Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2019-09-24
Accepted: 2019-10-15
Published Online: 2019-11-14
Published in Print: 2019-12-18

©2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. 10.1515/jpm-2020-frontmatter1
  2. Review
  3. Delivery room handling of the newborn
  4. Original Articles – Obstetrics
  5. Examining the validity of a predictive model for vaginal birth after cesarean
  6. Correlation between endometrial thickness and perinatal outcome for pregnancies achieved through assisted reproduction technology
  7. Significance of the routine first-trimester antenatal screening program for aneuploidy in the assessment of the risk of placenta accreta spectrum disorders
  8. A decade’s experience in primipara, term, singleton, vertex parturients with a sustained low rate of CD
  9. Survey of alongside midwifery-led care in North Rhine-Westfalia, Germany
  10. Correlation between aneuploidy pregnancy and the concentration of various hormones and vascular endothelial factor in follicular fluid as well as the number of acquired oocytes
  11. Bacteriuria in pregnancy varies with the ambiance: a retrospective observational study at a tertiary hospital in Doha, Qatar
  12. Microarray findings in pregnancies with oligohydramnios – a retrospective cohort study and literature review
  13. Lifestyle characteristics of parental electronic cigarette and marijuana users: healthy or not?
  14. Influence of maternal HIV infection on fetal thymus size
  15. Original Articles – Fetus
  16. Clinical outcome of prenatally suspected cardiac rhabdomyomas of the fetus
  17. Original Articles – Newborns
  18. Prolonged ventilation and postnatal growth of preterm infants
  19. Letter to the Editor
  20. Neonatal sepsis associated with Lactobacillus supplementation
Heruntergeladen am 27.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jpm-2019-0345/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen