ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Outcomes after attempted external cephalic version with two prior cesarean deliveries.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: American college of obstetricians and gynecologists (ACOG) considers patients with two prior cesarean deliveries (CDs) to be candidates for a trial of labor and separately recommends that external cephalic version (ECV) be offered for malpresentation. However, little is known about the safety, success rate, or effect on maternal and neonatal outcomes of ECV among patients with two prior CDs. This study aimed to evaluate obstetric outcomes after ECV in patients with two prior CDs to guide counseling. Study design: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with two prior CDs with non-anomalous, singleton births after 36 weeks' gestation utilizing the US Natality Database from 2018 to 2023. Pregnant patients with breech pregnancies who had an ECV attempt were compared with those who did not. The adverse maternal outcomes included blood transfusion, uterine rupture, unplanned hysterectomy, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Adverse neonatal outcomes included 5-minute Apgar score < 7, immediate or prolonged assisted ventilation, neonatal ICU (NICU) admission, seizure, and death. ECV success rate and mode of delivery were also assessed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed. Results: Among the 16,293 included births, 15,965 (98.0%) had a repeat CD (rCD) for malpresentation without an ECV attempt and 328 (2.0%) had an ECV attempt. Of these 328 ECVs, 223 (68.0%) were successful. Adverse maternal composite outcomes did not differ between births after an ECV attempt and those without (1.8% vs. 1.5%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-2.71). Those who had an ECV attempt had a lower risk of adverse neonatal composite outcomes compared to those who did not (9.5% vs. 18.2%; aOR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37-0.79). Of the 223 who had a successful ECV, 152 (68.2%) underwent rCD without trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) and 71 (31.8%) underwent TOLAC. Among those with a successful ECV, there was no difference in adverse maternal or neonatal morbidities between those who had a TOLAC after successful ECV and those who did not. Conclusion: These data suggest that among patients with two prior CDs, an ECV had a success rate similar to the published rate in the general obstetric population and may be associated with decreased neonatal morbidity compared to patients with no attempted ECV.
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.