Trial of labour after two caesarean sections (TOLA2C) and risk of uterine rupture, a retrospective single centre study
Trial of labour after two caesarean sections (TOLA2C) and risk of uterine rupture, a retrospective single centre study

Trial of labour after two caesarean sections (TOLA2C) and risk of uterine rupture, a retrospective single centre study

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Sep 3;24(1):576. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06763-x.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Most 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).

METHODS: The 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, Chi2 -tests and t-tests for independent samples were performed.

RESULTS: A 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.

CONCLUSION: TOLA2C 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.

PMID:39227780 | DOI:10.1186/s12884-024-06763-x