ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Trial of labour after two caesarean sections (TOLA2C) and risk of uterine rupture, a retrospective single centre study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost German hospitals do not offer a trial of labour after two caesarean sections (TOLA2C). TOLA2C is claimed to be associated with too many complications, above all the high risk of uterine rupture. The objective of this study is to review our experience with TOLA2C, with special attention paid to the risk and probability of uterine ruptures. Secondary outcomes include comparing neonatal and maternal outcomes in the group of TOLA2C with the group of elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS) and to assess the success rate for vaginal birth after two caesarean sections (VBAC-2).
methodsThe retrospective cohort study was conducted in a community hospital in North Rhine-Westphalia. Inclusion criteria were all pregnant women with two caesarean sections in their medical history, with a current vertex singleton pregnancy and the absence of morphological abnormalities of the foetus, who gave birth in our facility between January 2015 and June 2021. Descriptive statistics were calculated and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, Fishers exact tests, Chi
resultsA total of 91 cases were included in the TOLA2C-group. These were compared to 99 cases that, within the same time frame, had an elective repeat caesarean section (ERCS-group). There was no statistically significant difference found in the neonatal outcome between the two groups (except for the neonatal pH-value: p 0.024). The hospital stay was significantly shorter in the TOLA2C-group, while maternal complication rates were almost similar (13.2% in the TOLA2C-Group, vs. 16.2% in the ERCS-Group). The success rate for TOLA2C was 55%. No complete uterine rupture was found, but in three cases an incomplete rupture (3.3% rate for incomplete uterine ruptures) occurred, but had no influence on the neonatal outcome.
conclusionTOLA2C is not associated with a worse maternal or neonatal outcome compared to ERCS, and especially the risk of complete uterine ruptures seems to be low. TOLA2C should be more widely offered to suitable patients who are motivated for it.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.