Premium
Cephalic extraction versus breech extraction in second‐stage caesarean section: a retrospective study
Author(s) -
Ezra O,
LahavEzra H,
Meyer R,
Cahan T,
Ilan H,
MazakiTovi S,
Sivan E,
Barzilay E,
Haas J
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
bjog: an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.157
H-Index - 164
eISSN - 1471-0528
pISSN - 1470-0328
DOI - 10.1111/1471-0528.16314
Subject(s) - medicine , caesarean section , cephalic presentation , obstetrics , retrospective cohort study , apgar score , population , pregnancy , surgery , gestational age , vaginal delivery , genetics , biology , environmental health
Objective Our primary objective was to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes based on the attempted mode of extraction. Our secondary objective was to compare the outcomes based on the actual mode of extraction. Design A retrospective cohort study at a single tertiary centre between the years 2011 and 2019. Setting The study included 1028 cases of term pregnancies in vertex presentation that were delivered by caesarean section at the second stage of delivery. Population Patients were grouped according to the attempted mode of extraction: attempted cephalic extraction (674) and breech extraction (354). A subgroup analysis was conducted, comparing successful cephalic extraction (615), failed cephalic extraction (59) and breech extraction (354). Methods Both maternal and neonatal complication rates were compared between the groups. Results There were significantly more uterine incision extensions (27.4 versus 11.9%, P < 0.001) and increased need for blood transfusion (10.7 versus 6.2%, P = 0.018) in the cephalic extraction compared with the breech extraction group. The highest rate of uterine incision extensions (45.8%) and need for blood transfusion (22%) was in the subgroup of failed cephalic extraction. The rate of adverse neonatal outcomes was comparable between the two groups. However, in the subgroup of failed cephalic extraction, there were higher rates of low 1‐minute Apgar scores, NICU hospitalisation and limb fractures compared with successful cephalic extractions and breech extractions ( P = 0.016, 0.01, <0.001, respectively). Conclusions Breech extraction in second‐stage caesarean section is associated with fewer maternal complications compared wiith attempted cephalic extraction without increasing neonatal complication rates. Tweetable abstract In breech versus cephalic extraction, breech extraction was found to have better outcomes in second‐stage caesarean section.