2nd VBAC Safe?
Archived User
Jul 30, 2011 04:54 PM
|
RE: 2nd VBAC Safe?
Archived User
Jul 30, 2011 04:56 PM
Planned VBAC is not only safe, but having had one already, absent a new indication for cesarean, a second planned VBAC is your safest and best option. The likelihood of VBAC is greatly increased and the likelihood of scar rupture is greatly reduced once you have a VBAC under your belt, so to speak. On the other hand, planning an elective repeat cesarean exposes you not only to the risks of any individual surgery but to the risks of accumulating cesarean surgeries. In other words, your ob is not practicing evidence-based medicine--not to mention denying you every person's inalienable right to refuse surgery. Moreover, if the hospital is "not equipped to do a VBAC," by which she presumably means it isn't equipped to handle an emergency, then your hospital isn't equipped to handle any laboring woman, period. |
RE: 2nd VBAC Safe?
Archived User
Jul 30, 2011 06:06 PM
May I follow up with a related question? Does the lower risk of rupture apply for the 2nd VBAC if the c-section was an inverted J incision? The first VBAC was successful with a 10 + lb baby at home. ( There was no doctor to be found who would consider a VBAC with a classical incision.) Would you think that a repeat home birth would be tempting fate, or would the calculated risk be lower now that we have a "proven" scar? And if lower, do you have a percent risk? I am a midwife that has always felt that the risk of VBAC after an upper uterine segment incision is too risky at home. Is there more to consider here? Thanks
|
RE: 2nd VBAC Safe?
Henci Goer
Aug 01, 2011 03:15 PM
First, let me clarify. So far as I understand it, an inverted J incision is not a classical incision. A classical incision is a straight, vertical incision on the body of the uterus. A J-incision is a transverse incision that has been extended up into the body of the uterus. (Here is a page, where, if you scroll down, you can see an image of the various types of cesarean incisions.) That being said, any incision into the uterine muscle is thought to increase the risk of scar rupture to an unacceptable degree, which means no one is doing VBACs in these women. The best data we have on risk of the scar giving way with an unconventional scar type comes from a large, multicenter U.S. study in which a mixed group of 105 women with inverted-T, J-shaped, and classical incisions managed to slip through the net and labor. Two percent had scar ruptures versus an rate (when labor was not induced or strengthened with I.V. oxytocin) of 0.4% in the overall planned VBAC population. That population size is too small to make a judgment on safety. For example, if one more woman had had a scar rupture, the rate would jump to 3%, nor do we know whether risk differs among the scar types. All of this is to say that there is no research that could help guide you. Since I doubt that the obs in your community will be any more willing to agree to a VBAC--although it might be worthwhile to check around--it comes down to you and your client deciding which set of risks she prefers to run: the risks of cesarean surgery and of accumulating another cesarean scar or the risk of scar rupture in an environment unprepared to deal with it. In a functional maternity care system, of course, she wouldn't be faced with this kind of choice. ~ Henci |
All Times America/New_York
Forum Disclaimer
Please note that this Forum is intended to help women make informed decisions about their care. The content is not a substitute for medical advice.



