OBJECTIVE:

It has been claimed that a trial of labor after cesarean carries higher maternal and fetal risks than planned cesarean delivery. Because the management of such patients in our department differs from that described in some studies, and is perhaps more cautious, we hypothesized that the outcome may be better.

METHODS:

We identified women with 1 previous low uterine segment cesarean who had delivered a cephalic singleton infant at gestational age 34 weeks or more from January 2000 through May 2005. Our policy is to encourage such women to undergo a trial of labor unless cesarean delivery is indicated. Unless otherwise indicated, our policy is to wait for spontaneous labor. We do not use prostaglandins, and recommend cesarean delivery if the cervix is unripe.(Bishop score< 6). We compared the outcome between women who underwent a trial of labor and women who underwent planned cesarean delivery.

RESULTS:

A trial of labor was attempted by 841 women (80% successful), and 467 underwent planned cesarean delivery. Uterine rupture was observed in 1 woman 18 hours after vaginal delivery. There was no difference in major or minor maternal morbidity. There was no serious neonatal morbidity. Among the planned cesarean patients, hospital stay was longer, and there were more admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit.

CONCLUSION:

With our well-defined protocol, a trial of labor after cesarean seems to be as safe for the mother and infant as planned cesarean delivery, and the hospital stay is shorter.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

II-2

With a well-defined management protocol, a trial of labor after cesarean seems to be as safe for the mother and infant as planned cesarean delivery.