Clock C, Kurtzman J, White J, Chung J H
Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR 97239, USA.
J Perinatol. 2009 Feb;29(2):96-100. doi: 10.1038/jp.2008.227. Epub 2009 Jan 8.
To determine the odds of cesarean, operative vaginal delivery and vaginal birth after cesarean after successful external cephalic version (ECV) compared with singleton pregnancies eligible for a trial of labor.
A matched case-control study was performed using the Memorial Care OBStat Database from 1 January 1998 to 31 July 2006. We identified 197 participants who underwent a successful ECV (study group) and compared them with the next two women presenting for labor management, matched for parity, gestational age, delivery history (previous cesarean delivery) and type of labor (spontaneous or induced).
There was no significant difference in the adjusted matched odds of cesarean delivery between the study group and control group overall (16.8 vs 11.9%; odds ratio (OR) 1.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 2.97), even when subanalyzed according to parity. There was also no significant difference in adjusted matched odds of operative vaginal delivery for the study group and control group, 15.9 vs 8.9% (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.32 to 3.51). Among patients with a prior cesarean, those who underwent successful ECV had a cesarean delivery rate of 11.1% compared with 16.7% in the matched control group (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.47 to 7.43).
Cesarean delivery and operative vaginal delivery rates following successful ECV are not increased in our data set compared with matched controls, even in patients with a prior cesarean delivery. This information may be useful when counseling patients who are contemplating an ECV attempt due to non-cephalic presentation at term.
确定与符合阴道试产条件的单胎妊娠相比,成功实施外倒转术(ECV)后剖宫产、阴道助产及剖宫产后阴道分娩的几率。
使用纪念护理妇产科统计数据库进行一项匹配病例对照研究,研究时间为1998年1月1日至2006年7月31日。我们确定了197例成功实施ECV的参与者(研究组),并将他们与接下来前来进行分娩管理的两名女性进行比较,根据产次、孕周、分娩史(既往剖宫产史)和分娩类型(自然分娩或引产)进行匹配。
总体而言,研究组和对照组之间调整后的剖宫产匹配几率没有显著差异(分别为16.8%和11.9%;优势比(OR)为1.70;95%置信区间(CI)为0.98至2.97),即使按产次进行亚分析也是如此。研究组和对照组之间调整后的阴道助产匹配几率也没有显著差异,分别为15.9%和8.9%(OR为1.06;95%CI为0.32至3.51)。在有剖宫产史的患者中,成功实施ECV的患者剖宫产率为11.1%,而匹配对照组为16.7%(OR为0.59;95%CI为0.47至7.43)。
在我们的数据集中,与匹配对照组相比,成功实施ECV后的剖宫产和阴道助产率没有增加,即使是有剖宫产史的患者。在为因足月非头位而考虑尝试ECV的患者提供咨询时,这些信息可能会有所帮助。