Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2014 Jun;123(6):1327-1334.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000295.

Mode of delivery after successful external cephalic version: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Marcella de Hundt  1 , Joost Velzel, Christianne J de Groot, Ben W Mol, Marjolein Kok
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Mode of delivery after successful external cephalic version: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Marcella de Hundt et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the mode of delivery in women after a successful external cephalic version by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Library for studies reporting on the mode of delivery in women after successful external cephalic version at term and women with a spontaneous cephalic-presenting fetus.

Methods of study selection: Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality. The association between mode of delivery and successful external cephalic version was expressed as a common odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Tabulation, integration, and results: We identified three cohort studies and eight case-control studies, reporting on 46,641 women. The average cesarean delivery rate for women with a successful external cephalic version was 21%. Women after successful external cephalic version were at increased risk for cesarean delivery for dystocia (odds ratio [OR] 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.0), cesarean delivery for fetal distress (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.6-2.9), and instrumental vaginal delivery (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.1-1.7).

Level of evidence: Women who have had a successful external cephalic version for breech presentation are at increased risk for cesarean delivery and instrumental vaginal delivery as compared with women with a spontaneous cephalic presentation. Nevertheless, with a number needed to treat of three, external cephalic version still remains a very efficient procedure to prevent a cesarean delivery.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Mode of term singleton breech delivery. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 340. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:235–7.
    1. Chan LY, Tang JL, Tsoi KF, Fok WY, Chan LW, Lau TK. Intrapartum cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2004;104:155–60.
    1. Jain S, Mulligama C, Tagwira V, Guyer C, Cheong Y. Labour outcome of women with successful external cephalic version: a prospective study. J Obstet Gynaecol 2010;30:13–6.
    1. Vezina Y, Bujold E, Varin J, Marquette GP, Boucher M. Cesarean delivery after successful external cephalic version of breech presentation at term: a comparative study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;190:763–8.
    1. Clock C, Kurtzman J, White J, Chung JH. Cesarean risk after successful external cephalic version: a matched, retrospective analysis. J Perinatol 2009;29:96–100.