American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 195, Issue 4 , Pages 1148-1152, October 2006

Can uterine rupture in patients attempting vaginal birth after cesarean delivery be predicted?

  • George A. Macones, MD, MSCE

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA
  • ,
  • Alison G. Cahill, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
  • ,
  • David M. Stamilio, MD, MSCE

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
  • ,
  • Anthony Odibo, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA
  • ,
  • Jeffrey Peipert, MD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
  • ,
  • Erika J. Stevens, MS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO
    • Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA

Received 10 March 2006; received in revised form 15 May 2006; accepted 10 June 2006.

Objective

This study was undertaken to use multivariable methods to develop clinical predictive models for the occurrence of uterine rupture by using both antepartum and early intrapartum factors.

Study design

This was a planned secondary analysis from a multicenter case-control study of uterine rupture among women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) delivery. Multivariable methods were used to develop 2 separate clinical predictive indices–one that used only prelabor factors and the other that used both prelabor and early labor factors. These indices were also assessed with the use of Receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results

We identified 134 cases of uterine rupture and 665 noncases. No single individual factor is sufficiently sensitive or specific for clinical prediction of uterine rupture. Likewise, the 2 clinical predictive indices were neither sufficiently sensitive nor specific for clinical use (receiver operating characteristic curve [area under the curve] 0.67 and 0.70, respectively).

Conclusion

Uterine rupture cannot be predicted with either individual or combinations of clinical factors. This has important clinical and medical-legal implications.

Key words: Uterine rupture, VBAC

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supported by a grant from NICHD (RO1 HD 35631). G.A.M. is a recipient of a K24 grant from NICHD (K24 HD01289), which partially supports this work. J.P. is a recipient of a K24 grant from NICHD (K24 HD01298), which partially supports this work.Presented at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine, January 30-February 4, 2006, Miami, FL.Reprints not available from the authors.

PII: S0002-9378(06)00766-6

doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.042

American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 195, Issue 4 , Pages 1148-1152, October 2006