Prediction of successful vaginal birth after caesarean section based on Flamm and Geiger scoring system a prospective observational study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184118Keywords:
Scar tenderness, Successful VBAC, TOLAC, Trial of labourAbstract
Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the adequacy of Flamm and Geiger scoring system in prediction of successful vaginal birth after caesarean section.
Methods: A prospective observational study was carried out on 75 pregnant women with previous one caesarean section in department of obstetrics and Gynecology, St Stephen’s hospital, New Delhi over a period of one year.
Results: In the present study, out of 75 patients, 40% patients had successful VBAC and 60% patients had emergency LSCS. Among successful VBAC 70% patients had spontaneous vaginal delivery, while 23.3% patients had vacuum assisted and 6.7% had forceps assisted vaginal delivery. Most of the patients with total Flamm and Geiger score < 3 at the time of admission had emergency caesarean section while most of the patients with score >4 had successful VBAC. There were 53.3%, 75%, 85.7% and 100% probabilities of Successful VBAC with total score 4,5,6 and >8 respectively. Mean score for successful VBAC was 5±1.66and for emergency caesarean was 2.97±0.83.
Conclusions: As total Flamm and Geiger score increases, a chance of successful VBAC increases. Application of Flamm and Geiger scoring gives fare judgment of successful vaginal birth in TOLAC and reduces the rate of failed trial leading to emergency caesarean section, thus improving outcome in a trial of labor.
References
EURO-PERISTAT Project: European perinatal health report. Health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe in 2010, 2013.
Marshall NE, Fu R, Guise JM. Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205(3):262-e1.
Guise JM, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA, Marshall N, Fu RR, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. Evidence report/technology assessment. 2010;191:1.
Morrison JJ, Rennie JM, Milton PJ. Neonatal respiratory morbidity and mode of delivery at term: influence of timing of elective caesarean section. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 1995;102(2):101-6.
Solheim KN, Esakoff TF, Little SE, Cheng YW, Sparks TN, Caughey AB. The effect of cesarean delivery rates on the future incidence of placenta previa, placenta accreta, and maternal mortality. J Maternal-Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24(11):1341-6.
Arjun G. Caesarean Section: Evaluation, guidelines and recommendations. Indian J Med Ethics. 2008;5(3):117-20.
Shakti V, Behera RC, Sandhu GS, Singh A, Bandhu HC. Vaginal Birth after Caesarean Delivery. Obstet Gynecol India. 2006;56(4).
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: Birth after previous caesarean birth; Green Top Guidelines No. 45(Oct 2015).
Mcmohan MJ, Luther ER, Bowes WA, Olshan AF. Comparison of a trial of labour with an elective second caesarean section. N Engl J Med. 1996;335(10):689-95.
Flamm BL, Newman LA, Thomas SJ, Fallon D, Yoshida MM. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: results of a 5-year multicenter collaborative study. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76(5 Pt 1):750-4.
Phelan JP, Clark SL, Diaz F, Paul RH. Vaginal birth after cesarean. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;157(6):1510-5.
Tater A, Garg S, Jawa A, Jain M. Safety and efficacy of trial of labour after cesarean. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5:4335-8.
Patel RM, Kansara VM, Patel SK, Anand N. Impact of FLAMM scoring on cesarean section rate in previous one lower segment cesarean section patient. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016;5:3820-3.
Panchal A, Soni A, Joshi P, Vaishnav G, Pagi SL. Analytical study of factors determining success rate of trial of scar (TOS). Int J Med Sci Public Health. 2015;4:853-7.
Narang H, Singhal S, Ravi V. Assessment of factors individually and as a scoring system in predictive screening for VBAC in patients undergoing trial of labour after single previous caesarean section. IOSR-JDMS. 2014;13(10):109-15.
Ray P, Mondal A, Ray PK. Outcome of Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Section: A Prospective Study. Int J Sci Stud. 2016;4(9):121-4.
Rahman R, Khanam NN, Islam N, Begum KF, Pervin HH, Arifuzzaman M. The outcome of Vaginal Birth After Caesarean Section (VBAC): a descriptive study. Medicine Today. 2013;25(1):14-7.
Doshi HU, Jain RK, Vazirani AA. Prognostic factors for successful vaginal birth after cesarean section—Analysis of 162 cases. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2010;60(6):498-502.
Guise JM, Denman MA, Emeis C, Marshall N, Walker M, Fu R, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(6):1267-78.
Zaitoun MM, Eldin SA, Mohammad EY. A prediction score for safe and successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a prospective controlled study. J Women’s Health Care. 2013;2(129):2167-0420.
Quinones JN, Stamilio DM, Pare E. The effect of prematurity on VBAC success and maternal morbidity. ACOG. 2005;105:519.
Huang WH, Nakashima DK, Rumney PJ, Keegan KA. Inter-delivery interval and the success of VBAC. ACOG. 2002;99:41-4.
