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
. 2020 Nov;42(11):712-716.
doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1713804. Epub 2020 Nov 30.

Is Vaginal Breech Delivery Still a Safe Option?

Maria Pulido Valente  1 , Maria Carvalho Afonso  1 , Nuno Clode  1
Affiliations

Is Vaginal Breech Delivery Still a Safe Option?

Maria Pulido Valente et al. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2020 Nov.

Abstract
in English, Portuguese

Objective: To determine whether there was any difference in neonatal and maternal outcomes between breech vaginal delivery and cephalic vaginal delivery.

Methods: A retrospective, case-control study was conducted between January 2015 and December 2017 in a Portuguese hospital. A total of 26 cases of breech vaginal delivery were considered eligible and 52 pregnant women formed the control group.

Results: Induced labor was more frequent in the breech vaginal delivery group (46% versus 21%, p = 0.022). Episiotomy was more common in the breech vaginal delivery group (80% versus 52%, p = 0.014), and one woman had a 3rd degree perineal laceration. Newborns in the study group had a lower birthweight (2,805 g versus 3,177 g, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the neonatal outcomes.

Conclusion: The present study showed that breech vaginal delivery at term compared with cephalic presentation was not associated with significant differences in neonatal and maternal morbidity. It also suggests that breech vaginal delivery remains a safe option under strict selection criteria and in the presence of an experienced obstetrician.

Objetivo: Avaliar se existem diferenças nos desfechos perinatal e materno entre os partos pélvicos vaginais e eutócicos. MéTODOS: Realizou-se um estudo retrospectivo, caso controle, entre janeiro de 2015 e dezembro de 2017 em um hospital terciário em Portugal. Foram incluídos 26 casos de parto pélvico vaginal e o grupo controle foi formado por 52 grávidas.

Resultados: A indução do trabalho de parto ocorreu com mais frequência no grupo do parto pélvico vaginal (46% versus 21%, p = 0.022), bem como a realização de episiotomia (80% versus 52%, p = 0.014). Verificou-se um caso de laceração perineal de 3° grau. Os recém-nascidos do grupo de estudo apresentaram um peso inferior ao nascimento (2.805 g versus 3.177 g, p < 0.001). Em relação aos desfechos perinatais, não se observaram diferenças estatisticamente significativas. CONCLUSãO: O presente estudo mostrou que o parto pélvico vaginal no termo quando comparado com o parto eutócico não se associou a diferenças estatisticamente significativas na morbidade perinatal e materna, e sugere ainda que o parto pélvico vaginal parece ser uma opção segura em casos rigorosamente selecionados e na presença de um obstetra experiente.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflict of interests to declare.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart summarizing inclusion of women in the present study.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group Hannah M E, Hannah W J, Hewson S A, Hodnett E D, Saigal S, Willan A R.Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial Lancet 2000356(9239):1375–1383.10.1016/s0140-6736(00)02840-3 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group . Whyte H, Hannah M E, Saigal S, Hannah W J, Hewson S, Amankwah K. Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191(03):864–871. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.056. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Glezerman M. Five years to the term breech trial: the rise and fall of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(01):20–25. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.08.039. - DOI - PubMed
    1. PREMODA Study Group . Goffinet F, Carayol M, Foidart J M, Alexander S, Uzan S, Subtil D, Bréart G. Is planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term still an option? Results of an observational prospective survey in France and Belgium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(04):1002–1011. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.10.817. - DOI - PubMed
    1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine . Obstetric care consensus no. 1: safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(03):693–711. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000444441.04111.1d. - DOI - PubMed