Submitted:
16 May 2024
Posted:
16 May 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Statistical Method
Results
Discussion
Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Angolile CM, Max BL, Mushemba J, Mashauri HL. Global increased cesarean section rates and public health implications: A call to action. Health Sci Rep. 2023; 6(5): e1274.
- O’Mahony F, Hofmeyr GJ, Menon V. Choice of instruments for assisted vaginal delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; (11): CD005455.
- Bahl R, Van de Venne M, Macleod M, Strachan B, Murphy DJ. Maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to the instrument used for mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery: A prospective cohort study. BJOG. 2013; 120: 1526–32.
- Tempest N, Hart A, Walkinshaw S, Hapangama DK. A re-evaluation of the role of rotational forceps: Retrospective comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes following different methods of birth for malposition in the second stage of labour. BJOG. 2013; 120: 1277–84.
- O’Brien S, Day F, Lenguerrand E, Cornthwaite K, Edwards S, Siassakos D. Rotational forceps versus manual rotation and direct forceps: A retrospective cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017; 212: 119–25.
- Ekeus C, Hogberg U, Norman M. Vacuum assisted birth and risk for cerebral complications in term newborn infants: A population based cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014; 14: 36.
- Murphy DJ, Liebling RE, Verity L, Swingler R, Patel R. Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in second stage of labour: A cohort study. Lancet. 2001; 358: 1203–7.
- Blustein J, Liu J. Time to consider the risks of caesarean delivery for long term child health. BMJ. 2015; 350: h2410.
- Berghella V, Gimovsky AC, Levine LD, Vink J. Cesarean in the second stage: A possible risk factor for subsequent spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 217: 1–3.
- Moraitis AA, Oliver-Williams C, Wood AM, Fleming M, Pell JP, Smith GCS. Previous caesarean delivery and the risk of unexplained stillbirth: Retrospective cohort study and metaanalysis. BJOG. 2015; 122: 1467–74.
- Baldwin HJ, Patterson JA, Nippita TA; et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes following abnormally invasive placenta: A population based record linkage study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017; 96: 1373–81.
- Bourgioti C, Zafeiropoulou K, Fotopoulos S; et al. MRI prognosticators for adverse maternal and neonatal clinical outcome in patients at high risk for placenta accreta spectrum (PAS) disorders. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019; 50: 602–18.
- Klar M, Michels KB. Cesarean section and placental disorders in subsequent pregnancies - a meta-analysis. J Perinat Med. 2014; 42: 571–83.
- Cornthwaite K, Bahl R, Lenguerrand L, Winter C. Diagnosis and management of impacted fetal head at caesarean section: A national survey. BJOG. 2019; 126: 138.
- Cornthwaite K, Bahl R, Lenguerrand E, Winter C, Kingdom J, Draycott T. Impacted foetal head at caesarean section: A national survey of practice and training. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2021; 41: 360–6.
- Cornthwaite K, Draycott T, Bahl R, Hotton E, Winter C, Lenguerrand E. Impacted fetal head: A retrospective cohort study of emergency caesarean section. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021; 261: 85–91.
- Tähtinen RM, Cartwright R, Tsui JF; et al. Long-term impact of mode of delivery on stress urinary incontinence and urgency urinary incontinence: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Eur Urol. 2016; 70: 148–58.
- Nelson RL, Furner SE, Westercamp M, Farquhar C. Cesarean delivery for the prevention of anal incontinence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010; 2010: CD006756.
- Gyhagen M, Åkervall S, Milsom I. Clustering of pelvic floor disorders 20 years after one vaginal or one cesarean birth. Int Urogynecol J. 2015; 26: 1115–21.
- Crossland N, Kingdon C, Balaam MC, Betrán AP, Downe S. Women’s, partners’ and healthcare providers’ views and experiences of assisted vaginal birth: A systematic mixed methods review. Reprod Health. 2020; 17: 83.
- Gallagher AC, Hersh AR, Greiner KS, Tilden EL, Caughey AB. 662: Vacuum vs. forceps: A two-delivery cost-effectiveness analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019: 220: S438–9.
- Gei AF. Prevention of the first cesarean delivery: The role of operative vaginal delivery. Semin Perinatol. 2012; 36: 365–73.
- ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 154: Operative Vaginal Delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 126(5): e56-e65.
- Murphy DJ, Strachan BK, Bahl R. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Assisted vaginal birth: Green-top Guideline No. 26. BJOG. 2020; 127: e70–112.
- Romeo Domenico MM, Cioni M, Palermo F, Cilauro S, Romeo MG. Neurological assessment in infants discharged from a neonatal intensive care unit. Eur J Paediatr Neuro. 2013; 17: 192-198.
- Mwaniki MK, Atieno M, Lawn JE, Newton CR. Long-term neurodevelopment outcomes after intrauterine and neonatal insults: A systematic review. Lancet. 2012; 379: 445-52.
- Merriam AA, Ananth CV, Wright JD, Siddiq Z, D’Alton ME, Friedman AM. Trends in operative vaginal delivery, 2005-2013: A population-based study. BJOG. 2017; 124(9): 1365-1372.
- Thomas J, Paranjothy S. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: Clinical effectiveness support unit national sentinel caesarean section audit report. RCOG Press, London 2001.
- Petronijević M, Vrzić Petronijević S, Bratić D, Nikolić T, Jestrović Z. Trends in forceps deliveries in tertiary health care facility in Serbia. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2019; 147(3-4): 185-188.
- Hsieh DC, Smithers LG, Black M; et al. Implications of vaginal instrumental delivery for children’s school achievement: A population-based linked administrative data study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019; 1–7.
- Ayala NK, Schlichting LE, Kole MB; et al. Operative vaginal delivery and third grade educational outcomes. AJOG MFM. 2020; 2(4): 100221.
- Bahl R, Patel RR, Swingler R, Ellis M, Murphy DJ. Neurodevelopmental outcome at 5 years after operative delivery in the second stage of labor: A cohort study. AJOG. 2007. 197(2): P147.E1-147.E6.
- Werner EF, Janevic TM, Illuzzi J et al. Mode of delivery in nulliparous women and neonatal intracranial injury. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 1239–1246.
- Demissie K, Rhoads GG, Smulian JC; et al. Operative vaginal delivery and neonatal and infant adverse outcomes: Population based retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2004; 329: 24–9.
- Towner D, Castro MA, Eby-Wilkens E, Gilbert WM. Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341: 1709–14.
- Aiken AR, Aiken CE, Alberry MS, Brockelsby JC, Scott JG. Management of fetal malposition in the second stage of labor: A propensity score analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 212: 355.e1–7.
- Mcauliffe F, Donnelly V, O’Connor B; et al. Comparison of morbidity in planned cesarean versus planned vaginal birth at term -12 month follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004: 191: S189.
- Zhou H, Ding Y, Yang Y; et al. Effects on developmental outcomes after cesarean birth versus vaginal birth in Chinese children aged 1- 59 months: A cross-sectional community-based survey. PeerJ. 2019; 7: e7902.
- Johanson RB et al. Maternal and child health after assisted vaginal delivery: Five-year follow up of a randomised controlled study comparing forceps and ventouse. BJOG. 1999; 106: 544–549.
- Smithers LG, Mol BW, Wilkinson C, Lynch JW. Implications of caesarean section for children’s school achievement: A populationbased study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016; 56: 374–380.
| n (%) | ||
|---|---|---|
| Maternal age | 30 ± 5.5 | |
| Maternal comorbidity | Without | 40 (81.6) |
| Gestational hypertension | 3 (6.1) | |
| Gestational diabetes | 4 (8.2) | |
| Hypothyreosis | 2 (4.1) | |
| Parity | 1 | 41 (83.7) |
| 2 | 5 (10.2) | |
| 3 | 2 (4.1) | |
| 4 | 1 (2) | |
| Gestational age of delivery (weeks) | 39 | 2 (4.1) |
| 40 | 47 (95.9) | |
| Episiotomy | 38 (77.6) | |
| Rupture of the cervix, perineum and/or vagina | 20 (40.8) | |
| Epidural anaesthesia | 17 (34.7) | |
| Duration of labor (min) | 467.4 ± 164.1 | |
| Duration of the 2nd stage of labor (min) | 69.7 ± 35.2 | |
| Newborn gender | Male | 39 (79.6) |
| Female | 10 (20.4) | |
| Birthweight (grams) | 3523.3 ± 465.1 | |
| 5th min Apgar score (AS) | 7.2 ± 2.4 | |
| Non-reassuring intrapartum CTG | 6 (12.2) | |
| Meconium stained amniotic fluid | 4 (8.2) | |
| Signs of perinatal asphyxia | 25 (51) | |
| Pathological ultrasound of CNS | 1 (3) | |
| Pathological neurological status of the newborn | 8 (16.3) | |
| Cephalhematoma | 20 (40.8) | |
| Hyperbilirubinemia | 17 (34.7) | |
| Adverse long-term neurological outcome | 3 (6.4) |
| OR | 95% CI for OR | p | ||
| Gender of the child | 0.508 | 0.055 | 4.686 | 0.55 |
| Birthweight | 1 | 0.998 | 1.001 | 0.708 |
| Apgar score | 0.575 | 0.407 | 0.813 | 0.002 |
| Parity | 0.605 | 0.109 | 3.347 | 0.565 |
| Duration of labor | 1.001 | 0.996 | 1.005 | 0.757 |
| Duration of the 2nd stage of labor | 1.002 | 0.981 | 1.023 | 0.847 |
| Episiotomy | 0.206 | 0.041 | 1.027 | 0.054 |
| Rupture of the cervix, perineum and/or vagina | 0.426 | 0.077 | 2.367 | 0.329 |
| Intrapartum CTG | 3.083 | 0.459 | 20.697 | 0.246 |
| Cephalhematoma | 1.562 | 0.341 | 7.154 | 0.565 |
| Signs of perinatal asphyxia | 9.882 | 1.111 | 87.902 | 0.04 |
| Epidural anaesthesia | 1.157 | 0.213 | 5.443 | 0.88 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).