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
Comparative Study
. 2018 May;125(6):693-702.
doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14820. Epub 2017 Aug 21.

Perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality among term singletons following midcavity operative vaginal delivery versus caesarean delivery

G M Muraca  1   2   3 , A Skoll  2   3 , S Lisonkova  1   2   3 , Y Sabr  2   4 , R Brant  3   5 , G W Cundiff  2   3 , K S Joseph  1   2   3
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Perinatal and maternal morbidity and mortality among term singletons following midcavity operative vaginal delivery versus caesarean delivery

G M Muraca et al. BJOG. 2018 May.

Abstract

Objective: To quantify severe perinatal and maternal morbidity/mortality associated with midcavity operative vaginal delivery compared with caesarean delivery.

Design: Population-based, retrospective cohort study.

Setting: British Columbia, Canada.

Population: Term, singleton deliveries (2004-2014) by attempted midcavity operative vaginal delivery or caesarean delivery in the second stage of labour, stratified by indication for operative delivery (n = 10 901 deliveries; 5057 indicated for dystocia, 5844 for fetal distress).

Methods: Multinomial propensity scores and mulitvariable log-binomial regression models were used to estimate adjusted rate ratios (ARR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

Main outcome measures: Composite severe perinatal morbidity/mortality (e.g. convulsions, severe birth trauma and perinatal death) and severe maternal morbidity (e.g. severe postpartum haemorrhage, shock, sepsis and cardiac complications).

Results: Among deliveries with dystocia, attempted midcavity operative vaginal delivery was associated with higher rates of severe perinatal morbidity/mortality compared with caesarean delivery (forceps ARR 2.11, 95% CI 1.46-3.07; vacuum ARR 2.71, 95% CI 1.49-3.15; sequential ARR 4.68, 95% CI 3.33-6.58). Rates of severe maternal morbidity/mortality were also higher following midcavity operative vaginal delivery (forceps ARR 1.57, 95% CI 1.05-2.36; vacuum ARR 2.29, 95% CI 1.57-3.36). Among deliveries with fetal distress, there were significant increases in severe perinatal morbidity/mortality following attempted midcavity vacuum (ARR 1.28, 95% CI 1.04-1.61) and in severe maternal morbidity following attempted midcavity forceps delivery (ARR 2.34, 95% CI 1.54-3.56).

Conclusion: Attempted midcavity operative vaginal delivery is associated with higher rates of severe perinatal morbidity/mortality and severe maternal morbidity, though these effects differ by indication and instrument.

Tweetable abstract: Perinatal and maternal morbidity is increased following midcavity operative vaginal delivery.

Keywords: Birth injury; caesarean delivery; forceps extraction; instrumental vaginal delivery; obstetric trauma; operative vaginal delivery; vacuum extraction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise J‐M, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014;210:17–93. - PubMed
    1. Gossett DR, Gilchrist‐Scott D, Wayne DB, Gerber SE. Simulation training for forceps‐assisted vaginal delivery and rates of maternal perineal trauma. Obstet Gynecol 2016;128:429–35. - PubMed
    1. Deering S. Forceps, simulation, and social media. Obstet Gynecol 2016;128:425–6. - PubMed
    1. Dildy GA, Belfort MA, Clark SL. Obstetric forceps: a species on the brink of extinction. Obstet Gynecol 2016;128:436–9. - PubMed
    1. Towner D, Castro MA, Eby‐Wilkens E, Gilbert WM. Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1709–14. - PubMed

Publication types