Home| Journals | Statistics Online Expert | About Us | Contact Us

    About this Journal  | Table of Contents

[Abstract] [PDF] [HTML] [Linked References]

International Journal of Recent Trends in Science and Technology, ISSN 2277-2812 E-ISSN: 2249-8109

Volume 10, Issue 3, April 2014 pp 530-537

Research Article

Study of Obstetric and Fetal Outcome of Post Caesarean Section Pregnancy at Tertiary Care Center

 Anagha A. Jinturkar1, Dipti Dongaonkar2

 {1Assistant Professor, 2Dean and Professor}

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Government Medical College, Latur, Maharashtra, INDIA.

Academic Editor : Dr. Aher K.R.



Background: With the sky rocketing caesarean section rates an increasing number of women face the issue of mode of delivery in their current pregnancy. There are conflicting reports regarding the safety of a trial for vaginal birth after caesarean delivery (VBAC) in terms of uterine rupture, maternal and perinatal morbidity. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the obstetric and fetal outcomes of patients presenting at term with a history of one previous LSCS. Methods: A six months prospective, observational study was conducted where all patients who had a term pregnancy with a history of previous one LSCS in between were included after obtaining their consent for participation. The obstetric and fetal outcomes of these patients in the present pregnancy were noted and tabulated. A descriptive analysis of these outcomes was carried out. Results: 320 Patients at term, with a history of previous one LSCS were studied. Of these, trial for a VBAC was attempted by 182 patients and 46.70% had a successful VBAC. 138 patients underwent an elective repeat caesarean delivery. 65.62% of the patients who had a history of previous vaginal delivery (s) had a successful VBAC. Out of 18 patients who were induced with PGE2 gel, only 22.22% delivered vaginally. Scar dehiscence was seen in 2.72% of the patients who opted for a trial for VBAC. Perinatal morbidity was higher in cases of repeat caesarean delivery than in those who had a successful VBAC (12.12% Vs 0 percent). Maternal complications were also higher in patients who had a repeat LSCS compared to those who had a successful VBAC (12.76% Vs 2.74%). Conclusion: With an increase in the proportion of patients with a history of previous LSCS, it is essential for health care institutions to have proper antenatal counseling regarding VBAC and a well defined management protocol in an effort to increase the number of VBACs and bring down the overall caesarean rates. Patients with a history of prior vaginal delivery have an increased likelihood for a successful VBAC. A successful VBAC is associated with a lower perinatal and maternal morbidity than repeat caesarean delivery. This is relevant for counseling women about their choices after a caesarean delivery.