Vaginal birth after a previous caesarean section functional vs static marker
Background: Primary caesarean section increases the chances of repeat caesarean section. In our society, there is a high prevalence of teenage pregnancy which is a high risk factor for primary caesarean section due to cephalopelvic disproportion. Continuing growth of these adolescents and their pel...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nigerian Medical Association, Akwa Ibom State Branch
2011-06-01
|
| Series: | Ibom Medical Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ibommedicaljournal.org/index.php/imjhome/article/view/86 |
| Summary: | Background: Primary caesarean section increases the chances of repeat caesarean section. In our society, there is a high prevalence of teenage pregnancy which is a high risk factor for primary caesarean section due to cephalopelvic disproportion. Continuing growth of these adolescents and their pelvic bones, makes their pelves bigger in the next pregnancy with a favourable prospect of vaginal delivery. A reliable method of assessment of these patients to identify those who are suitable for trial of labour is invaluable.
Aims: This study was aimed at assessing the reliability of the Head Fitting Test (HFT) compared with Antepartum X-ray Pelvimetry (AXRP) in selecting patients for trial of labour after primary caesarean section.
Methods: This was a comparative prospective study of 300 women with a previous lower uterine segment caesarean section who were delivered at Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria, over a six year period (1998-2003).
Result: The sensitivity of HFT was 97.0%, specificity was 96.1%, positive predictive value was 98.0% and negative predictive value 94.2%. The sensitivity of AXRP was 34.7%, specificity 24.0%, positive predictive value 31.3% and negative predictive value 26.9%. The sensitivity of PXRP was 49.3%, specificity 18.7%, positive predictive value 37.8% and negative predictive value 26.9%.
Conclusion: HFT was found to be a better method than AXRP in selecting the women with a previous caesarean section, who were suitable for trial of labour and vaginal delivery.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1597-7188 2735-9964 |