ArticleBirth (Berkeley, Calif.)2026
Viability of Successful Vaginal Delivery in Triplet Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study Over 20 Years.
Article in Birth (Berkeley, Calif.), 2026. 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.
- Viability of Successful Vaginal Delivery in Triplet Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study Over 20 Years.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 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
backgroundTriplet pregnancies are increasingly leaning toward planned cesarean deliveries (CD), yet data on determining factors and outcomes remain limited.
objectiveTo assess the success of vaginal delivery (VD) in triplet pregnancies and compare neonatal and maternal outcomes with those of CD.
methodsA retrospective cohort study included triplet pregnancies from 26 weeks' gestation onward in a tertiary center between 2000 and 2020. The primary outcome was the actual mode of delivery (successful VD, planned CD, or unplanned CD). Secondary outcomes included indications for CD, as well as neonatal and maternal outcomes.
resultsSeventy-one women were included. Of these, 41% attempted VD, with 90% successfully delivering vaginally. Planned CD was chosen by 59%, mainly for fetal (64%) or maternal (19%) indications, or patient preference (17%). Neonatal mortality did not differ significantly between planned VD and CD (aOR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.06-1.50; p = 0.14). However, neonates born via VD compared to CD had lower risks for sepsis (aOR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.04-0.94; p = 0.04) and retinopathy of prematurity (aOR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.03-0.93; p = 0.04). Neonates born after VD had higher risks of infant respiratory distress syndrome (OR: 2.70; 95% CI: 1.03-7.08; p = 0.04) and interventricular hemorrhage (OR: 4.00; 95% CI: 1.20-13.35; p = 0.02), though these associations were not significant after adjusting for gestational age (p = 0.92 and p = 0.32, respectively).
conclusionsWomen opting for VD in triplet pregnancies had a 90% success rate. VD can be safe after careful case selection and access to highly trained personnel at a tertiary center. Centralization might enhance safety and outcomes, offering essential insights for clinicians.
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.