Outcomes of induction in trial of labor after cesarean delivery


  • Anubha Varshney Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, GGSH Hospital, New Delhi, India
  • Zehra Mohsin Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, JNMCH AMU, Uttar Pradesh, India




Cephalopelvic disproportion, Induction of labor, Lower segment cesarean section, Trial of labor after cesarean, Vaginal birth after cesarean


Background: The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of induction of labor in women attempting trial of labor after cesarean delivery and to compare maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality in women who were induced to those delivering spontaneously.

Methods: The prospective study was carried out in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in collaboration with the Neonatal Section, Department of Pediatrics at J.N. Medical College and Hospital, AMU Aligarh. The sample included 280 women with one previous cesarean section, of whom 130 women underwent induction of labor (study group) and 150 were admitted with spontaneous onset of labor. Prostaglandin gel and intracervical Foley’s were used for cervical ripening in the study group. Indication of cesarean section, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcome were studied in between groups.

Results: Overall rate of vaginal delivery after cesarean section was 45.3% and 56% in both study and control group respectively. The rate of cesarean section were higher in women who were induced and having unfavorable cervix. Maternal and neonatal morbidity were not significantly higher as compared in both groups, however one case of scar rupture was found in study group.

Conclusions: Induction of labor in women with previous cesarean section had higher rates of cesarean section however it does not adversely affect neonatal and maternal morbidity. Overall vaginal birth is safe and effective in women with previous cesarean section by prostaglandin gel or intracervical Foley’s. Authors cautiously suggest, induction of labor should be considered in preselected patient with strict monitoring.


Bangal VB, Giri PA, Shinde KK, Gavhane SP. Vaginal birth after cesarean section. North American Journ of medical sciences. 2013;5(2):140.

Menacker F, Hamilton BE. Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States. US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics; 2010.

Singh G, Gupta ED. Rising incidence of caesarean section in rural area in Haryana, India: a retrospective analysis. Inter J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;17(2):1-5

Radhakrishnan T, Vasanthakumari KP, Babu PK. Increasing Trend of Caesarean Rates in India: Evidence from NFHS-4. JMSCR. 2017;5(8):26167-76.

Al Qahtani N, Al Borshaid S, Al Enezi H. Induction of Labor with PGE2 after One Previous Cesarean Section: 18 Years’ Experience in a University Hospital. International Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2011;2(1):35.

Cunningham FG, Bangdiwala SI, Brown SS, Dean TM, Frederiksen M, Hogue CR, King T, Lukacz ES, McCullough LB, Petit NF, Probstfield JL. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Section: New Insights March 8–10, 2010. Obstetric Anesthesia Digest. 2011;31(3):140-2.

Nguyen DT. Retrospective Study on Factors that may Contribute to Cesarean Delivery in Induced Women.

Ziyauddin F, Hakim S, Beriwal S. The transcervical foley catheter versus the vaginal prostaglandin e2 gel in the induction of labour in a previous one caesarean section–a clinical study. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2013;7(1):140.

Kashif S, Mansoor M, Tariq R, Tahira T. Vaginal birth after caesarean section; to evaluate factors for successful outcome. Professional Medical J. 2010;17(4).

Ashwal E, Hiersch L, Melamed N, Ben-Zion M, Brezovsky A, Wiznitzer A, et al. Pregnancy outcome after induction of labor in women with previous cesarean section. The J Maternal-Fetal Neonat Med. 2015;28(4):386-91.






Original Research Articles