Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37237350›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2023

Trial of labour versus elective caesarean delivery for estimated large for gestational age foetuses after prior caesarean delivery: a multicenter retrospective study.

Matthieu Chamagne, Maêva Bôle Richard, Alexandre Vallee, Jellila Tahiri, Bruno Renevier, Sandra Dahlhoff, Diane Garcia, Alexandre Vivanti, Jean Marc Ayoubi

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. FIGO good practice recommendations for vaginal birth after cesarean section.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Guideline
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Matthieu ChamagneDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Foch Hospital, 92150, Suresnes, France. matthieuchamagne@gmail.com.
Maêva Bôle RichardDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Foch Hospital, 92150, Suresnes, France.
Alexandre ValleeDepartment of Clinical Research and Innovation, Foch Hospital, 92150, Suresnes, France.
Jellila TahiriDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Hôpital Archet II, Pôle "Femme-Mère-Enfant'', Nice, France.
Bruno RenevierDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, André Grégoire Hospital, 93100, Montreuil, France.
Sandra DahlhoffDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mercy Hospital, 57530, Ars-Laquenexy, France.
Diane GarciaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Foch Hospital, 92150, Suresnes, France.
Alexandre VivantiDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, DMU Santé Des Femmes Et Des Nouveau-Nés, Antoine Béclère Hospital, Paris Saclay University, AP-HP, 92140, Clamart, France.
Jean Marc AyoubiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Foch Hospital, 92150, Suresnes, France.
Hôpital Foch · FRCentre Hospitalier Intercommunal André Grégoire Montreuil · FRUniversité Paris-Saclay · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLower rates of successful trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) in association with fetal macrosomia were previously reported. This study aimed to compare TOLAC to elective caesarean delivery (CD) in women with estimated fetal weight large for gestational age (eLGA) and a prior CD. Primary outcome was to analyse the mode of delivery in case of TOLAC. Secondary outcome was to compare maternal and foetal morbidity.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective, descriptive, multicentric, cohort study in five maternity units between January and December 2020. Inclusion criteria were: women with a single prior CD and eLGA or neonatal weight > 90th percentile with singleton pregnancy and gestational age ≥ 37 weeks.

main outcome measuresrate of vaginal delivery, maternal and fetal morbidity including: shoulder dystocia, neonatal hospitalization, fetal trauma, neonatal acidosis, uterine rupture, 3

resultsFour hundred forty women met inclusion criteria, including 235 (53.4%) eLGA. 170 (72.3%) had a TOLAC (study group) and 65 (27.7%) an elective CD (control). 117 (68.82%) TOLAC had a vaginal delivery. No significant differences were found between the two groups in the rates of: postpartum haemorrhage, transfusion, Apgar score, neonatal hospitalization, and foetal trauma. Cord lactate was higher in the case of TOLAC (3.2 vs 2.2, p < 0.001). Median fetal weight was 3815 g (3597-4085) vs. 3865 g (3659-4168): p = 0.068 in the study vs. controls group respectively.

conclusionTOLAC for eLGA fetuses is legitimate because there is no difference in maternal-fetal morbidity, and the CD rate is acceptable.

Indexed as

Postpartum HemorrhageVaginal Birth after CesareanCesarean SectionCohort StudiesFemaleFetal WeightFetusGestational AgeHumansInfantInfant, NewbornPregnancyRetrospective StudiesTrial of LaborEstimated large for gestational ageMacrosomiaScarred uterusTrial of labour after caesarean delivery

Identifiers

PMID37237350
PMCPMC10214606
OpenAlexW4378468833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.