Dodd J M, Crowther C A, Huertas E, Guise J M, Horey D
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Adelaide, Women's and Children's Hospital, 72 King William Road, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, 5006.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 Oct 18(4):CD004224. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004224.pub2.
When a woman has had a previous caesarean birth, there are two options for her care in a subsequent pregnancy: planned elective repeat caesarean or planned vaginal birth. While there are risks and benefits for both planned elective repeat caesarean birth and planned vaginal birth after caesarean, current sources of information are limited to non-randomised cohort studies. Studies designed in this way have significant potential for bias and consequently conclusions based on these results are limited in their reliability and should be interpreted with caution.
To assess, using the best available evidence, the benefits and harms of a policy of planned elective repeat caesarean section with a policy of planned vaginal birth after caesarean section for women with a previous caesarean birth.
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (24 June 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2004), and PubMed (1966 to 24 June 2004).
Randomised controlled trials with reported data that compared outcomes in mothers and babies who planned a repeat elective caesarean section with outcomes in women who planned a vaginal birth, where a previous birth had been by caesarean.
Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.
There were no randomised controlled trials identified.
REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned vaginal birth after caesarean section for women with a prior caesarean birth are both associated with benefits and harms. Evidence for these care practices is drawn from non-randomised studies, associated with potential bias. Any results and conclusions must therefore be interpreted with caution. Randomised controlled trials are required to provide the most reliable evidence regarding the benefits and harms of both planned elective repeat caesarean section and planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth.
当一名女性既往有剖宫产史时,其后续妊娠的护理有两种选择:计划择期再次剖宫产或计划阴道分娩。虽然计划择期再次剖宫产和剖宫产后计划阴道分娩都有风险和益处,但目前的信息来源仅限于非随机队列研究。以这种方式设计的研究存在显著的偏倚可能性,因此基于这些结果得出结论的可靠性有限,应谨慎解读。
利用现有最佳证据,评估计划择期再次剖宫产政策与剖宫产后计划阴道分娩政策对有既往剖宫产史女性的益处和危害。
我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2004年6月24日)、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(《Cochrane图书馆》,2004年第1期)以及PubMed(1966年至2004年6月24日)。
报告了比较计划再次择期剖宫产的母亲和婴儿与计划阴道分娩的女性(既往有剖宫产史)结局数据的随机对照试验。
两名评价员独立评估试验质量并提取数据。
未识别到随机对照试验。
有既往剖宫产史的女性计划择期再次剖宫产和剖宫产后计划阴道分娩都有其益处和危害。这些护理措施的证据来自非随机研究,存在潜在偏倚。因此,任何结果和结论都必须谨慎解读。需要随机对照试验来提供关于有既往剖宫产史女性计划择期再次剖宫产和剖宫产后计划阴道分娩的益处和危害的最可靠证据。