Acta Scientific Women's Health (ASWH)(ISSN: 2582-3205)

Research Article Volume 4 Issue 5

Interpregnancy Interval and Labour Outcomes After Previous One Cesarean Section

Humaira Bibi1*, Naila Nasr Malik2, Rubina Qadeer3, Shamim Akhter1 and Saba Nasir4

1Assistant Professor, Gynae/Obs Department, Kuwait Teaching Hospital, Peshawar Medical College, Riphah International University Pakistan
2Associate Professor, Gynae/Obs Department, Kuwait Teaching Hospital, Peshawar Medical College, Riphah International University Pakistan
3Senior Registrar, Gynae/Obs Department, Kuwait Teaching Hospital, Peshawar Medical College, Riphah International University Pakistan
4District Specialist, District Headquarter Hospital, Haripur, Pakistan

*Corresponding Author: Humaira Bibi, Assistant Professor, Gynae/Obs Department, Kuwait Teaching Hospital, Peshawar Medical College, Riphah International University Pakistan.

Received: March 14, 2022; Published: April 07, 2022

Abstract

High rates of c section increases not only maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality but also increased burden on already overcrowded hospitals. VBAC not only reduces rates of cesarean sections and maternal morbidity but the hospital load of patients is also lessened.

Aim: To compare the labour outcomes of short vs long interpregnancy intervals in women with previous cesarean section.

Methods: It was a prospective Cross-sectional study conducted in Kuwait teaching and Mercy teaching hospitals of Peshawar from June 2020 to June 2021. Patient`s data were collected from patient`s record register. Patients who had lower segment cesarean section previously and singleton pregnancy with a cephalic presentation in present pregnancy were included in the study. Patients who had previous two or more cesarean sections, multiple gestations, Malpresentation in this pregnancy, and previous upper segment cesarean section were excluded from the study. Outcomes including vaginal delivery, cesarean section, postpartum hemorrhage, scar dehiscence, low Apgar score < 7 in five minutes, and NICU admission were recorded. The percentages and frequencies were calculated for categorical variables while mean and standard deviation were calculated for numerical variables. Student’s t test was applied to find out p value.

Results: Patients were divided in two groups with group 1 with interval less than 18 months and second group more than 18 months duration. There were no statistical difference of VBAC, Emergency repeat Cesarean section, PPH and scar dehiscence in both groups (p value 0.26, 0.21, 0.18, 0.19) respectively while NICU admissions is high in short interpregnancy interval p-value 0.05.

Conclusion: There is no difference of VBAC success and emergency Cesarean section rate, PPH and scar dehiscence on interpregnancy interval in women with previous one Cesarean section but low APGAR score and NICU admission of neonates is high in women with short interpregnancy interval than long interpregnancy interval in women with previous one Cesarean.

Keywords: Interpregnancy; Cesarean Section; VBAC

References

  1. Lundgren I., et al. “Clinician-centred interventions to increase vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC): a systematic review”. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 15 (2015): 16.
  2. Ma RM., et al. “VBAC should be encouraged as a means to reduce the caesarean section rate in China: FOR: VBAC reduces not only the caesarean section rate but also other associated issues”. BJOG 123 (2016): 10.
  3. Rani H., et al. “Association of Caesarean Uterine Scar Health in Women with Previous One Caesarean Section in Relation to Inter-Pregnancy Interval”. Journal of Rawalpindi Medical College1 (2019): 47-50.
  4. Niazi N., et al. “Association of Short Interpregnancy Interval with Scar dehiscence”. Age (years) 31 (2018): 4-8.
  5. Santoso BI, ., et al. “How Long is the Safest Inter Delivery Interval in Women with Previous History of Caesarean Delivery?”. Indonesian Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (2018): 71-77.
  6. Stamilio DM., et al. “Short interpregnancy interval: risk of uterine rupture and complications of vaginal birth after caesarean delivery”. Obstetrics and Gynecology5 (2007): 1075-1082.
  7. Lilungulu A., et al. “Spectrum of maternal and perinatal outcomes among parturient women with preceding short inter-pregnancy interval at Bugando Medical Centre, Tanzania”. Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology (2015): 1.
  8. Mumtaz S., et al. “Rising trends and inequalities in caesarean section rates in Pakistan: Evidence from Pakistan Demographic and Health Surveys, 1990-2013”. PloS One10 (2017): e0186563.
  9. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth after previous caesarean birth”. Green-top Guideline No. 45. (2015).
  10. Luo Zc., et al. “Obstetricians’ perspectives on trial of labor after caesarean (TOLAC) under the two-child policy in China: a cross-sectional study”. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 21 (2021): 89.
  11. Mone F., et al. “Predicting why women have elective repeat caesarean deliveries and predictors of successful vaginal birth after caesarean”. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 1 (2014): 67-69.
  12. Rietveld AL., et al. “Effect of interpregnancy interval on the success rate of trial of labor after caesarean”. Journal of Perinatology11 (2017): 1192-1196.
  13. Huang WH., et al. “Interdelivery interval and the success of vaginal birth after caesarean delivery”. Gynecology and Obstetrics 1 (2002): 41-44.
  14. Alani WY., et al. “Factors influencing successful vaginal birth after caesarean delivery”. Bahrain Medical Bulletin 1 (2017): 24-28.
  15. Trojano G., et al. “VBAC: antenatal predictors of success”. Acta Bio Medica: Atenei Parmensis3 (2019): 300.
  16. Lilungulu A., et al. “Spectrum of maternal and perinatal outcomes among parturient women with preceding short inter-pregnancy interval at Bugando Medical Centre, Tanzania”. Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology1 (2015): 1-7.
  17. Hefley E. “Interpregnancy Interval and Neonatal Outcomes”.
  18. Kale I. “Does continuous cardiotocography during labor cause excessive fetal distress diagnosis and unnecessary caesarean sections?”. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine (2021): 1-6.
  19. Devane D., et al. “Cardiotocography versus intermittent auscultation of fetal heart on admission to labour ward for assessment of fetal wellbeing”. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1 (2017).
  20. Almas F., et al. “Correlation between inter-pregnancy interval and sonographically measured lower segment caesarean scar thickness”. Age (years) 26 (2021): 3-15.
  21. Eleje GU., et al. “Inter-Pregnancy interval (IPI): what is the ideal?”. Afrimedic Journal1 (2011): 36-38.

Citation

Citation: Humaira Bibi., et al. “Interpregnancy Interval and Labour Outcomes After Previous One Cesarean Section". Acta Scientific Women's Health 4.5 (2022): 02-06.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Humaira Bibi., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.




Metrics

Acceptance rate35%
Acceptance to publication20-30 days

Indexed In





News and Events


  • Certification for Review
    Acta Scientific certifies the Editors/reviewers for their review done towards the assigned articles of the respective journals.
  • Submission Timeline for Upcoming Issue
    The last date for submission of articles for regular Issues is July 10, 2022.
  • Publication Certificate
    Authors will be issued a "Publication Certificate" as a mark of appreciation for publishing their work.
  • Best Article of the Issue
    The Editors will elect one Best Article after each issue release. The authors of this article will be provided with a certificate of “Best Article of the Issue”.
  • Welcoming Article Submission
    Acta Scientific delightfully welcomes active researchers for submission of articles towards the upcoming issue of respective journals.
  • Contact US