ArticleCureus2025
Frequency of Successful Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Section in Women With a Previous Uterine Scar: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Applying HFMEA to reduce the incidence of puerperal infection after cesarean section converted from trial of vaginal labor.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rising rates of cesarean sections (CS) globally have increased the number of women with prior cesarean deliveries who may be candidates for vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). This study explores the factors influencing the success of VBAC in women with a previous CS and fetomaternal complications associated with VBAC failure.
methodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted at the obstetrics unit of Ayub Teaching Hospital, Abbottabad, Pakistan, enrolling 102 eligible women who had previously undergone a CS and were offered the option of attempting a vaginal delivery. Demographic, clinical, and obstetric data were collected on a predesigned proforma. The success of VBAC was defined as a vaginal delivery without the need for an emergency cesarean section. Statistical analysis was done using IBM SPSS Statistics software, version 27.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).
resultsParticipants had a mean age of 30.36 ± 2.07 years and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 25.71 ± 0.90 kg/m². The overall VBAC success rate was 79.4% (n=81), with a failure rate of 20.6% (n=21). Maternal complications, including infection and the need for blood transfusion, were significantly higher in the VBAC failure group. Fetal outcomes also showed that VBAC failures were more likely to result in an Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity, and Respiration (APGAR) score <7 at 10 minutes (P=0.006). Similarly, maternal complications were significantly higher in VBAC failures (5/21, 23.8%) than successes (3/81, 3.7%;
conclusionsVBAC is a safe and effective option for women with a prior CS, with a high success rate; however, VBAC failure was found to be an independent predictor of both fetal and maternal complications. Our findings suggest the importance of a personalized approach to VBAC assessment and counselling to optimize outcomes for women undergoing trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC).
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.