Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Induction of labor at term following external cephalic version in nulliparous women is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine whether induction of labor (IOL) after successful external cephalic version (ECV) is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery (CD) compared with IOL with spontaneous cephalic presentation.

Methods

Retrospective case–control study. All women having IOL after successful ECV were eligible. Each woman in the study group was matched for parity, age and indication for induction with two consecutive controls having IOL and spontaneous cephalic presentation. The primary outcome measure was CD. Secondary outcomes measures were operative vaginal delivery, perineal tear/episiotomy and post-partum hemorrhage.

Results

79 women enrolled in the study group were matched with 158 controls. The overall incidence of CD was significantly higher in the study group compared with the control group (20.3 vs. 10.1 %; OR 2.25, 95 % CI 1.06–4.79, P = 0.03). After dividing the groups according to parity, the difference in the CD rate remained statistically significant for nulliparous women (36.7 vs. 15 %; OR 3.28, 95 % CI 1.17–9.16, P = 0.02), but not for multiparous women (10.2 vs. 7.1 %; OR 1.48, 95 % CI 0.44–4.92, P = 0.53). There was no significant difference in adjusted odds ratios for secondary outcomes.

Conclusion

Induction of labor after successful ECV in nulliparous women increased the risk of CD compared with IOL with spontaneous cephalic presentation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hickok DE, Gordon DC, Milberg JA, Williams MA, Daling JR (1992) The frequency of breech presentation by gestational age at birth: a large population-based study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 166:851–852

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR (2000) Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomized multicenter trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet 356:1375–1383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rietberg CC, Elferink-Stinkens PM, Visser GH (2005) The effect of the Term Breech Trial on medical intervention behavior and neonatal outcome in The Netherlands: an analysis of 35,453 term breech infants. BJOG 112:205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Yogev Y, Horowitz E, Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, Kaplan B (2002) Changing attitudes toward mode of delivery and external cephalic version in breech presentations. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 79:221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hofmeyr GJ, Kulier R (2012) External cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD000083

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Reinhard J, Sänger N, Hanker L, Reichenbach L, Yuan J, Herrmann E, Louwen F (2013) Delivery mode and neonatal outcome after a trial of external cephalic version (ECV): a prospective trial of vaginal breech versus cephalic delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 287:663–668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. American college of Obstetrics and Gynecologists (2012) ACOG practice bulletin 13: external cephalic version. Obstet Gynecol 95:2

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bogner G, Hammer BE, Schausberger C, Fischer T, Reisenberger K, Jacobs V (2014) Patient satisfaction with childbirth after external cephalic version. Arch Gynecol Obstet 289:523–531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Egge T, Schauberger C, Schaper A (1994) Dysfunctional labor after external cephalic version. Obstet Gynecol 83:771–773

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wax JR, Sutula K, Lerer T, Steinfeld J, Ingardia CJ (2000) Labor and delivery following successful external cephalic version. Am J Perinatol 17:183–186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Siddiqui D, Stiller RJ, Collins J, Laifer SA (1999) Pregnancy outcome after successful external cephalic version. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181:1092–1095

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Matsuzaki S, Shimoya K, Murata Y (2006) Cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version of breech presentation at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 93:248–249

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Clock C, Kurtzman J, White J, Chung JH (2009) Cesarean risk after successful external cephalic version: a matched, retrospective analysis. J Perinatol 29:96–100

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stine LE, Phelan JP, Wallace R, Eglinton GS, van Dorsten JP, Schifrin BS (1985) Update on external cephalic version performed at term. Obstet Gynecol 65:642–646

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Laros RJ, Flanagan TA, Kilpatrick SJ (1995) Management of term breech presentation: a protocol of external cephalic version and selective trial of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 172:1916–1923

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lau TK, Lo KW, Rogers M (1997) Pregnancy outcome after successful external cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 176:218–223

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ben-Haroush A, Perri T, Bar J, Yogev Y, Bar-Hava I, Hod M et al (2002) Mode of delivery following successful external cephalic version. Am J Perinatol 19:355–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chan LY, Leung TY, Fok WY, Chan LW, Lau TK (2002) High incidence of obstetric interventions after successful external cephalic version. BJOG 109:627–631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vézina Y, Bujold E, Varin J, Marquette GP, Boucher M (2004) Cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version of breech presentation at term: a comparative study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:763–768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kuppens SM, Hasaart TH, van der Donk MW, Huibers M, Franssen MJ, de Becker BM et al (2008) Fewer caesarean sections for breech presentation following external cephalic version according to a protocol in a special office visit. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 152:1323–1328

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Jain S, Mulligama C, Tagwira V, Guyer C, Cheong Y (2010) Labour outcome of women with successful external cephalic version: a prospective study. J Obstet Gynaecol 30:13–16

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rijnders M, Offerhaus P, van Dommelen P, Wiegers T, Buitendijk S (2010) Prevalence, outcome, and women’s experiences of external cephalic version in a low-risk population. Birth 37:124–133

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Chan LY, Tang JL, Tsoi KF, Fok WY, Chan LW, Lau TK (2004) Intrapartum cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 104:155–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD et al (2003) Births: final data for 2002. Natl Vital Stat Rep 52:1–113

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD (2009) Births: final data for 2006. National Vital Statistics Reports, vol 57, No 7. National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville

  26. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Induction of Labor (1999). ACOG Practice bulletin #10. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington, DC

  27. Smith KM, Hoffman MK, Sciscione A (2003) Elective induction of labor in nulliparous women increases the risk of cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 101:45S

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cammu H, Martens G, Ruyssinck G, Amy JJ (2002) Outcome after elective labor induction in nulliparous women: a matched cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:240–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Seyb ST, Berka RJ, Socol ML, Dooley SL (1999) Risk of cesarean delivery with elective induction of labor at term in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 94:600–607

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Luthy DA, Malmgren JA, Zingheim RW (2004) Cesarean delivery after elective induction in nulliparous women: the physician effect. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:1511–1515

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vrouenraets FP, Roumen FJ, Dehing CJ, van den Akker ES, Aarts MJ, Scheve EJ (2005) Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 105:690–697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Sciscione AC, Hoffman MK (2005) Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas. Obstet Gynecol 105:698–704

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yeast JD, Jones A, Poskin M (1999) Induction of labor and the relationship to cesarean delivery: a review of 7001 consecutive inductions. Am J Obstet Gynecol 180:628–633

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Prysak M, Castronova FC (1998) Elective induction versus spontaneous labor: a case-control analysis of safety and efficacy. Obstet Gynecol 92:47–52

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ehrenthal DB, Jiang X, Strobino DM (2010) Labor induction and the risk of a cesarean delivery among nulliparous women at term. Obstet Gynecol 116:35–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Moore LE, Rayburn WF (2006) Elective induction of labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol 49:698–704

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Tam T, Conte M, Schuler H, Malang S, Roque M (2013) Delivery outcomes in women undergoing elective labor induction at term. Arch Gynecol Obstet 287:407–411

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Chan LY, Leung TY, Fok WY, Chan LW, Lau TK (2004) Prediction of successful vaginal delivery in women undergoing external cephalic version at term for breech presentation. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 116:39–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Eilen B, Fleischer A, Schulman H, Jagani N (1984) Fetal acidosis and the abnormal fetal heart rate tracing: the term breech fetus. Obstet Gynecol 63:233–236

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Christian SS, Brady K (1991) Cord blood acid-base values in breech-presenting infants born vaginally. Obstet Gynecol 78:778–781

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Socol ML, Cohen L, Depp R, Dooley SL, Tamura RK (1988) Apgar scores and umbilical cord arterial pH in the breech neonate. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 27:37–43

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Westgren LM, Ingemarsson I (1988) Breech delivery and mental handicap. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2:187–194

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Danielian P, Wang J, Hall M (1996) Long-term outcome by method of delivery of fetuses in breech presentation at term: population based follow up. BMJ 312:1451–1453

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Sørensen HT, Steffensen FH, Olsen J, Sabroe S, Gillman MW, Fischer P et al (1999) Long-term follow-up of cognitive outcome after breech presentation at birth. Epidemiology 10:554–556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Main DM, Main EK, Moore DH 2nd (2000) The relationship between maternal age and uterine dysfunction: a continuous effect throughout reproductive life. Am J Obstet Gynecol 182:1312–1320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Ecker JL, Chen KT, Cohen AP, Riley LE, Lieberman ES (2001) Increased risk of cesarean delivery with advancing maternal age: indications and associated factors in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:883–887

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Maslow AS, Sweeny AL (2000) Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term. Obstet Gynecol 95:917–922

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Mulik V, Usha Kiran TS, Bethal J, Bhal PS (2003) The outcome of macrosomic fetuses in a low risk primigravid population. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 80:15–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Kabiri D, Elram T, Aboo-Dia M, Elami-Suzin M, Elchalal U, Ezra Y (2011) Timing of delivery after external cephalic version and the risk for cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 118:209–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Mrs. Tali Bdolach for her assistance in the statistical analysis and in the interpretation of the data.

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hadassah Medical Center, Hebrew University Medical School, P.O. Box 12000, 91120, Jerusalem, Israel

      Yael Hants, Doron Kabiri, Uriel Elchalal, Sagit Arbel-Alon & Yossef Ezra

    2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Affiliated with the Hebrew University, Hadassah School of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel

      Lior Drukker

    Authors
    1. Yael Hants
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Doron Kabiri
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    3. Uriel Elchalal
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    4. Sagit Arbel-Alon
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    5. Lior Drukker
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    6. Yossef Ezra
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Yael Hants.

    Additional information

    Y. Hants and D. Kabiri contributed equally to this work.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Hants, Y., Kabiri, D., Elchalal, U. et al. Induction of labor at term following external cephalic version in nulliparous women is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery. Arch Gynecol Obstet 292, 313–319 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3643-z

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-015-3643-z

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation