Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pregnancy outcomes of induced labor in women with previous cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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

Abstract

Purpose

To systematically review the literature about maternal and neonatal outcomes following induction of labor (IOL) and spontaneous labor (SL) in women with previous cesarean section (PCS).

Methods

PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane library searches; January 2000–February 2013. Inclusion criteria: women attempting labor after PCS, singleton term pregnancies. Women undergoing IOL were compared with women in SL. Method for induction, mode of delivery, uterine rupture/dehiscence, post-partum hemorrhage, emergency hysterectomy and any maternal or neonatal morbidity and mortality were analyzed. MOOSE guidelines were followed. Interstudies heterogeneity was tested. A random effect model was generated if heterogeneity was >25 %. Pooled odds ratio with 95 % confidence interval (OR, 95 % CI) were calculated.

Results

Eight articles included 4,038 women with IOL (23.2 %) and 13,374 women with SL (76.8 %). IOL was associated with a lower incidence of vaginal delivery (OR 0.66; 95 % CI 0.55–0.80) and higher rates of cesarean section (OR 1.52; 95 % CI 1.26–1.83), uterine rupture/dehiscence (OR 1.62; 95 % CI 1.13–2.31), and post-partum hemorrhage (OR 1.57; 95 % CI 1.20–2.04), although hysterectomy was similar between the two groups (OR 2.60; 95 % CI 0.52–13.1). Neonatal morbidity was similar after IOL or SL (OR 1.13; 95 % CI 0.75–1.69).

Conclusions

Induction of labor increases the risk of uterine rupture/dehiscence and of repeat cesarean section.

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
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. MacKenzie IZ, Bradley S, Embrey MP (1984) Vaginal prostaglandins and labour induction for patients previously delivered by caesarean section. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 91:7–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vause S, Macintosh M (1999) Evidence based case report: use of prostaglandins to induce labour in women with a caesarean section scar. BMJ 318:1056–1058

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, Martin DP (2001) Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 345:3–8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Locatelli A, Regalia AL, Ghidini A, Ciriello E, Biffi A, Pezzullo JC (2004) Risks of induction of labour in women with a uterine scar from previous low transverse caesarean section. BJOG 111:1394–1399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kayani SI, Alfirevic Z (2005) Uterine rupture after induction of labour in women with previous caesarean section. BJOG 112:451–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jozwiak M, Dodd JM (2013) Methods of term labour induction for women with a previous caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD009792

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Udayasankar V, Padmagirison R, Majoko F (2008) National survey of obstetricians in Wales regarding induction of labour in women with a previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol 28:48–50

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gupta P, Elmardi A, Bathula U, Chandru S, Charlesworth D (2011) Induction of labour in women with one previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol 31:131–133

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Alsayegh AK, Roshdy S, Hany Akef A, Maha Youssef S (2007) Induction of labor with prostaglandin e2 in women with previous cesarean section and unfavorable cervix. Int J Health Sci (Qassim) 1:211–216

    Google Scholar 

  10. Delaney T, Young DC (2003) Spontaneous versus induced labor after a previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 102:39–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lin C, Raynor BD (2004) Risk of uterine rupture in labor induction of patients with prior cesarean section: an inner city hospital experience. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:1476–1478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ravasia DJ, Wood SL, Pollard JK (2000) Uterine rupture during induced trial of labor among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:1176–1179

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Umeadi UP, Mehta R, Thomas S (2007) Delivery outcome after induction of labour using prostaglandin in women with one previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol 27:810–811

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Lahav E, Horowitz E, Hod M, Kaplan B (2004) Induction of labor with prostaglandin E2 in women with previous cesarean section and unfavorable cervix. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 116:173–176

  15. Shatz L, Novack L, Mazor M, Weisel RB, Dukler D, Rafaeli-Yehudai T, Israeli O, Erez O (2013) Induction of labor after a prior cesarean delivery: lessons from a population-based study. J Perinat Med 41:171–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Agnew G, Turner MJ (2009) Vaginal prostaglandin gel to induce labour in women with one previous caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol 29:209–211

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chilaka VN, Cole MY, Habayeb OM, Konje JC (2004) Risk of uterine rupture following induction of labour in women with a previous caesarean section in a large UK teaching hospital. J Obstet Gynaecol 24:264–265

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gomez LR, Burgos J, Cobos P, Melchor JC, Osuna C, Centeno Mdel M, Larrieta R, Fernandez-Llebrez L, Martinez-Astorquiza T (2011) Oxytocin versus dinoprostone vaginal insert for induction of labor after previous cesarean section: a retrospective comparative study. J Perinat Med 39:397–402

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McDonagh MS, Osterweil P, Guise JM (2005) The benefits and risks of inducing labour in patients with prior caesarean delivery: a systematic review. BJOG 112:1007–1015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    A. C. Rossi

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Unit, University of Brescia, Piazzale Spedali Civili 1, 25123, Brescia, Italy

    Federico Prefumo

Authors
  1. A. C. Rossi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Federico Prefumo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Federico Prefumo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rossi, A.C., Prefumo, F. Pregnancy outcomes of induced labor in women with previous cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 291, 273–280 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3444-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3444-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation