Vbac Royal Colleg

Birth After Previous
Caesarean Birth
Green-top Guideline No. 45

October 2015
Birth After Previous Caesarean Birth
This is the second edition of this guideline. The first edition was published in 2007 under the same title.1
Executive summary of recommendations

Antenatal care schedule
What is the recommended schedule of antenatal care for pregnant women with previous caesarean
delivery?
Implementation of a vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery (VBAC) versus elective repeat
caesarean section (ERCS) checklist or clinical care pathway is recommended to facilitate best P
practice in antenatal counselling, shared decision making and documentation. [New 2015]
Suitability for planned VBAC

Which women are best suited to have a planned VBAC?
Planned VBAC is appropriate for and may be offered to the majority of women with a singleton
pregnancy of cephalic presentation at 37+0 weeks or beyond who have had a single previous lower
B
segment caesarean delivery, with or without a history of previous vaginal birth.
What are the contraindications to VBAC?
Planned VBAC is contraindicated in women with previous uterine rupture or classical caesarean scar
and in women who have other absolute contraindications to vaginal birth that apply irrespective of
D
the presence or absence of a scar (e.g. major placenta praevia).
In women with complicated uterine scars, caution should be exercised and decisions should be
made on a case-by-case basis by a senior obstetrician with access to the details of previous surgery.
D
Can women with two or more prior caesareans be offered planned VBAC?
Women who have had two or more prior lower segment caesarean deliveries may be offered VBAC
after counselling by a senior obstetrician. This should include the risk of uterine rupture and
C
maternal morbidity, and the individual likelihood of successful VBAC (e.g. given a history of prior
vaginal delivery). Labour should be conducted in a centre with suitable expertise and recourse to
immediate surgical delivery. [New 2015]
What factors are associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture in women undergoing VBAC?
An individualised assessment of the suitability for VBAC should be made in women with factors
that increase the risk of uterine rupture. P
Antenatal counselling
What are the overall aims of antenatal counselling?
The antenatal counselling of women with a previous caesarean birth should be documented in
the notes. P
A final decision for mode of birth should be agreed upon by the woman and member(s) of the
maternity team before the expected/planned date of delivery. P
When a date for ERCS is being arranged, a plan for the event of labour starting before the scheduled
date should be documented in the notes. P
RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 2 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

The routine use of VBAC checklists during antenatal counselling should be considered, as they
would ensure informed consent and shared decision making in women undergoing VBAC. [New 2015]
B
A patient information leaflet should be provided with the consultation.

P
What are the risks and benefits of planned VBAC versus ERCS from 39 +0
weeks of gestation?
Women should be made aware that successful VBAC has the fewest complications and therefore
the chance of VBAC success or failure is an important consideration when choosing the mode of
B
delivery.
Women should be made aware that the greatest risk of adverse outcome occurs in a trial of VBAC
resulting in emergency caesarean delivery.
B
Women should be informed that planned VBAC is associated with an approximately 1 in 200 (0.5%)
risk of uterine rupture.
B
Women should be informed that the absolute risk of birth-related perinatal death associated with
VBAC is extremely low and comparable to the risk for nulliparous women in labour.
C
Women should be informed that ERCS is associated with a small increased risk of placenta
praevia and/or accreta in future pregnancies and of pelvic adhesions complicating any future
C
abdominopelvic surgery.
The risk of perinatal death with ERCS is extremely low, but there is a small increase in neonatal
respiratory morbidity when ERCS is performed before 39+0 weeks of gestation. The risk of respiratory
C
morbidity can be reduced with a preoperative course of antenatal corticosteroids.
What is the likelihood of VBAC success?
Women should be informed that the success rate of planned VBAC is 7275%.
C
What factors determine the individualised likelihood of VBAC success?
Women with one or more previous vaginal births should be informed that previous vaginal delivery,
particularly previous VBAC, is the single best predictor of successful VBAC and is associated with a
C
planned VBAC success rate of 8590%. Previous vaginal delivery is also independently associated
with a reduced risk of uterine rupture.
Intrapartum management of planned VBAC

What delivery setting is appropriate for conducting planned VBAC?
Women should be advised that planned VBAC should be conducted in a suitably staffed and
equipped delivery suite with continuous intrapartum care and monitoring with resources available P
for immediate caesarean delivery and advanced neonatal resuscitation.
Women with an unplanned labour and a history of previous caesarean delivery should have a
discussion with an experienced obstetrician to determine feasibility of VBAC. [New 2015] P
Epidural analgesia is not contraindicated in a planned VBAC, although an increasing requirement
for pain relief in labour should raise awareness of the possibility of an impending uterine rupture.
D
Women should be advised to have continuous electronic fetal monitoring for the duration of
planned VBAC, commencing at the onset of regular uterine contractions.
D
How should women with a previous caesarean birth be advised in relation to induction or augmentation
of labour?

Women should be informed of the two- to three-fold increased risk of uterine rupture and around
1.5-fold increased risk of caesarean delivery in induced and/or augmented labour compared with
D
spontaneous VBAC labour.
A senior obstetrician should discuss the following with the woman: the decision to induce labour,
the proposed method of induction, the decision to augment labour with oxytocin, the time intervals P
for serial vaginal examination and the selected parameters of progress that would necessitate
discontinuing VBAC.
Clinicians should be aware that induction of labour using mechanical methods (amniotomy or
Foley catheter) is associated with a lower risk of scar rupture compared with induction using
D
prostaglandins.
Planning and conducting ERCS

What elements are involved in the perioperative, intraoperative and postoperative care for ERCS?
ERCS delivery should be conducted after 39+0 weeks of gestation.

A
Antibiotics should be administered before making the skin incision in women undergoing ERCS.
[New 2015]
B
All women undergoing ERCS should receive thromboprophylaxis according to existing RCOG
guidelines. [New 2015] P
Early recognition of placenta praevia, adopting a multidisciplinary approach and informed consent
are important considerations in the management of women with placenta praevia and previous P
caesarean delivery. [New 2015]
How should women in special circumstances be cared for?

Clinicians should be aware that there is uncertainty about the safety and efficacy of planned
VBAC in pregnancies complicated by post-dates, twin gestation, fetal macrosomia, antepartum P
stillbirth or maternal age of 40 years or more. Hence, a cautious approach is advised if VBAC is
being considered in such circumstances.
Women who are preterm and considering the options for birth after a previous caesarean delivery
should be informed that planned preterm VBAC has similar success rates to planned term VBAC but
B
with a lower risk of uterine rupture.
1. Purpose and scope

The purpose of this guideline is to provide evidence-based information to inform the antenatal and
intrapartum care of pregnant women who have had previous caesarean delivery, with the options for
delivery being either planned vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery (VBAC) or elective repeat
caesarean section (ERCS).
2. Introduction and background epidemiology

There has been continued debate about defining an acceptable caesarean delivery rate and what rate
achieves optimal maternal and infant outcomes. The overall caesarean delivery rate in England for 2012
2013 was 25.5%2; the majority were emergency (14.8%) rather than elective (10.7%) caesarean births.
The caesarean delivery rates for Wales,3 Northern Ireland4 and Scotland5 in 20122013 were 27.5%, 29.8%
and 27.3% respectively. Hence, counselling women for and managing birth after caesarean delivery are
important issues.

There is a consensus (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE],6 Royal College of
Obstetricians and Gynaecologists [RCOG],1 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists [ACOG]/
National Institutes of Health [NIH]79) that planned VBAC is a clinically safe choice for the majority of
women with a single previous lower segment caesarean delivery. Such a strategy is also supported by
health economic modelling6,10 and would also at least limit any escalation of the caesarean delivery
rate and maternal morbidity associated with multiple caesarean deliveries.1115 This guideline provides
evidence-based recommendations on best practice for the antenatal and intrapartum management of
women undergoing planned VBAC and ERCS. The terms used in this guideline are defined in Appendix I.
3. Identification and assessment of evidence

This guideline was developed in accordance with standard methodology for producing RCOG Green-top
Guidelines. MEDLINE, PubMed, all Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews (Cochrane Central Register
of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Methodology Register, ACP Journal
Club, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects [DARE], Health Technology Assessment database
[HTA], Maternity and Infant Care), EMBASE and Trip were searched for relevant randomised controlled
trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and cohort studies. The search was restricted to articles
published between 2003 and February 2015. Search words included VBAC, TOLAC, vaginal birth
after caesarean, previous caesarean, prior caesarean and all relevant Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
terms. This guideline assesses the quality of evidence and determines the strength of recommendations
in accordance with Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria.
4. Identified studies and limitations of data

Notable publications within the last 10 years have included evidence-based systematic reviews,9,16,17 clinical
guidelines from the UK (RCOG 20071 and NICE 20116) and the USA (ACOG 20107; NIH 2010 Consensus
report8) and a study by the US National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD, 2004;
17 898 planned VBACs, 15 801 planned ERCSs at 37+041+0 weeks of gestation18). Important attributes
of the NICHD study18 include its large sample size, prospective strict case ascertainment and reporting
outcomes according to planned VBAC and planned ERCS antenatal decisions rather than observed
modes of delivery. Many of the recent studies vary in their case ascertainment and outcome criteria.
These include an Australian multicentre patient preference cohort trial (2012; 1237 planned VBACs,
1108 planned ERCSs at 38 +039 +0 weeks of gestation),19 a UK national casecontrol study (20122013;
UK Obstetric Surveillance System)12,13,20 and Scottish (2013),21 Australian (2010)22 and Dutch (2009) 23
population-based studies. Importantly, although planned ERCS is recommended to be conducted from
39 +0 weeks of gestation,6 most studies have reported ERCS outcomes for deliveries that have occurred
between 37+0 and 40 +0 weeks of gestation.
5. Antenatal care schedule

5.1 What is the recommended schedule of antenatal care for pregnant women with previous
caesarean delivery?
Implementation of a VBAC versus ERCS checklist or clinical care pathway is recommended to
facilitate best practice in antenatal counselling, shared decision making and documentation. P
The antenatal care schedule should comply with that recommended by the NICE antenatal
care guideline,24 with specific reviews as shown in Appendices II and III. NICE25 pathways
may also be used as guides when devising appropriate local clinical care pathways. Evidence
level 4
In the majority of cases, counselling for mode of delivery could be conducted by a member
of the maternity team soon after the womans midtrimester ultrasound, assuming that there

were no contraindications to planned VBAC. An obstetrician should be involved in any of
the following situations: the woman had contraindications that precluded VBAC, she was
uncertain of mode of delivery, she specifically requested ERCS, she required induction
of labour (e.g. more than 41+0 weeks of gestation) or she developed specific pregnancy
complications (e.g. pre-eclampsia, breech presentation, fetal growth restriction, macrosomia).
After initial counselling, some more complex cases may need senior support. In most cases,
the decision regarding mode of delivery should be finalised by 36 +0 weeks of gestation. Having Evidence
well-structured evidence-based patient information leaflets that list key points, including the level 4
probability of the woman having successful VBAC, is likely to improve the informed decision-
making process on mode of birth after caesarean delivery26 (see Appendix IV).
Use of specialist antenatal clinics designed to guide and support women through the informed
decision-making process on mode of birth after a primary caesarean delivery has been found
to improve VBAC attempt rates in Australia.27
6. Suitability for planned VBAC

6.1 Which women are best suited to have a planned VBAC?
Planned VBAC is appropriate for and may be offered to the majority of women with a singleton
pregnancy of cephalic presentation at 37+0 weeks or beyond who have had a single previous lower
B
segment caesarean delivery, with or without a history of previous vaginal birth.
There is a consensus, endorsed by evidence-based systematic reviews9,16,17 and clinical

guidelines,1,68 that planned VBAC is a safe and appropriate mode of delivery for the majority Evidence
level 2++
of pregnant women with a single previous lower segment caesarean delivery.
However, a review of the previous caesarean delivery records and current pregnancy is recommended
to identify contraindications to VBAC.
6.2 What are the contraindications to VBAC?

Planned VBAC is contraindicated in women with previous uterine rupture or classical caesarean scar
and in women who have other absolute contraindications to vaginal birth that apply irrespective of
D
the presence or absence of a scar (e.g. major placenta praevia).
In women with complicated uterine scars, caution should be exercised and decisions should be
made on a case-by-case basis by a senior obstetrician with access to the details of previous surgery.
D
Women with the following risk factors are considered to be at increased risk of adverse maternal and/or
perinatal outcome as a consequence of VBAC.
Previous uterine rupture

Based on limited observational data,2830 women who have experienced a previous uterine
rupture are reported to have a higher risk (5% or higher) of recurrent uterine rupture with Evidence
level 3
labour. Hence previous uterine rupture is considered a contraindication to VBAC.
Type of previous uterine incision

Based on limited observational data,31,32 there is insufficient evidence to support the safety
of VBAC in women with previous inverted T or J incisions, low vertical uterine incisions or
significant inadvertent uterine extension at the time of primary caesarean; hence caution Evidence
should be exercised in these women and decisions should be made by a senior obstetrician level 3
on a case-by-case basis. VBAC is contraindicated in women with previous classical caesearean
delivery due to the high risk of uterine rupture.33

Previous uterine surgery
Although previous uterine surgery is not within the scope of this guideline, there is uncertainty
whether women who have undergone laparoscopic or abdominal myomectomy, particularly
where the uterine cavity has been breached, are at increased risk of uterine rupture.3441 Uterine Evidence
rupture after hysteroscopic resection of uterine septum is considered a rare complication.42,43 level 3
Given this uncertainty, women who have had such uterine surgery should be considered to
have delivery risks at least equivalent to those of VBAC and managed similarly in labour.
Placenta praevia
A major degree of placenta praevia (and some cases of minor or partial placenta praevia)
is a contraindication to vaginal delivery, including VBAC (see RCOG Green-top Guideline
No. 27).44 A systematic review reported that women with one, two, or three or more previous
caesarean deliveries experience a 1%, 1.7% or 2.8% risk respectively of placenta praevia in
subsequent pregnancies,9 concurring with the findings of a recent UK population study and Evidence
meta-analysis.45 Placenta accreta occurs in 1114% of women with placenta praevia and one prior level 2++
caesarean delivery and in 2340% of women with placenta praevia and two prior caesarean
deliveries. In women with placenta praevia and five or more prior caesarean deliveries, the
incidence of placenta accreta is up to 67%.9 In view of these associations, the RCOG and NICE
have produced recommendations for women with a previous caesarean delivery which can be
found in RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 2744 and the NICE guideline.6
6.3 Can women with two or more prior caesareans be offered planned VBAC?
Women who have had two or more prior lower segment caesarean deliveries may be offered VBAC
after counselling by a senior obstetrician. This should include the risk of uterine rupture and
C
maternal morbidity, and the individual likelihood of successful VBAC (e.g. given a history of prior
vaginal delivery). Labour should be conducted in a centre with suitable expertise and recourse to
immediate surgical delivery.
A multivariate analysis of the NICHD study showed that there was no significant difference
in the rates of uterine rupture in VBAC with two or more previous caesarean births (9/975,
92/10000) compared with a single previous caesarean birth (115/16 915, 68/10000).46 These
findings concur with other observational studies, which, overall, have shown similar rates of
VBAC success with two previous caesarean births (VBAC success rates of 6275%) and single Evidence
level 2+
prior caesarean birth.4750 It is notable that more than half of the women with two previous
caesarean deliveries had also had a previous vaginal birth and 40% had a previous VBAC.
Hence, caution should be applied when extrapolating these data to women with no previous
vaginal delivery.
A systematic review51 has suggested that women with two previous caesarean deliveries
who are considering VBAC should be counselled about the success rate (71.1%), the uterine
rupture rate (1.36%) and the comparable maternal morbidity to the repeat caesarean delivery
option. The rates of hysterectomy (56/10000 compared with 19/10000) and transfusion
(1.99% compared with 1.21%) were increased in women undergoing VBAC after two previous Evidence
caesarean births compared with one previous caesarean birth. Therefore, provided that level 2++
the woman has been fully informed by a senior obstetrician of the increased risks and a
comprehensive individualised risk analysis has been undertaken of the indication for and the
nature of the previous caesarean deliveries, then planned VBAC may be supported in women
with two or more previous lower segment caesarean deliveries.
Women seeking multiple (e.g. three or more) future pregnancies should be counselled Evidence
that opting for ERCS may expose themselves to greater surgical risks for future pregnancies level 3

(particularly placenta praevia, placenta accreta and hysterectomy) associated with repeated ERCS Evidence
delivery1113,44,52,53 and therefore greater consideration ought to be given to attempting VBAC. level 3
6.4 What factors are associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture in women
undergoing VBAC?
An individualised assessment of the suitability for VBAC should be made in women with factors
that increase the risk of uterine rupture. P
Factors that potentially increase the risk of uterine rupture include short inter-delivery interval
(less than 12 months since last delivery), post-date pregnancy, maternal age of 40 years or
more, obesity, lower prelabour Bishop score, macrosomia and decreased ultrasonographic
lower segment myometrial thickness.20,22,23,5457 A recent retrospective study58 involving 3176 Evidence
patients evaluated the safety of women undergoing VBAC with a short inter-delivery interval. level 3
The study concluded that a short inter-delivery interval (less than 12 months) is not a risk factor
for major complications such as uterine rupture and maternal death, but that it is for preterm
delivery. Further data are needed before the safety of such an approach can be confirmed.
There is uncertainty in how to incorporate this knowledge in antenatal counselling and

therefore the presence of these risk factors does not contraindicate VBAC. However, such Evidence
factors may be considered during the decision-making process, particularly if considering level 2
induction or augmentation of VBAC labour (see section 8.2).
A recent meta-analysis59 has suggested that measurement of lower uterine segment (LUS)
thickness antenatally in women with a previous caesarean delivery could be used to predict
the occurrence of a uterine defect (scar dehiscence or scar rupture) in women undergoing
VBAC. According to the study, a myometrial thickness (the minimum thickness overlying
the amniotic cavity at the level of the uterine scar) cut-off of 2.14.0 mm provided a strong
negative predictive value for the occurrence of a uterine defect during VBAC, whereas a Evidence
myometrial thickness cut-off between 0.6 and 2.0 mm provided a strong positive predictive level 1+
value for the occurrence of a uterine defect. However, the study could not define an ideal LUS
thickness cut-off value usable in clinical practice. This meta-analysis provides support for the
use of antenatal LUS measurements in the prediction of a uterine defect in women undergoing
VBAC; however, clinical applicability needs be assessed in prospective observational studies
using a standardised method of measurement.
7. Antenatal counselling
7.1 What are the overall aims of antenatal counselling?
The antenatal counselling of women with a previous caesarean birth should be documented in
the notes. P
A final decision for mode of birth should be agreed upon by the woman and member(s) of the
maternity team before the expected/planned date of delivery. P
When a date for ERCS is being arranged, a plan for the event of labour starting before the scheduled
date should be documented in the notes. P
The routine use of VBAC checklists during antenatal counselling should be considered, as they
would ensure informed consent and shared decision making in women undergoing VBAC.
B
A patient information leaflet should be provided with the consultation.

P

Ideally, discussion should be individualised to the womans medical circumstances and consider her
individual chance of VBAC success and future reproductive preferences. The antenatal counselling
process should be documented in the medical records. Where possible, outcomes from women who give
birth at term (37+042+0 weeks of gestation) should be used for the purposes of antenatal counselling and
are used throughout this guideline. As up to 10% of women scheduled for ERCS go into labour before
39 +0 weeks, it is good practice to discuss and document a plan for delivery if labour starts prior to the
scheduled date.
Clinical trials have shown decision aids, specific patient information literature and VBAC
checklists, which encompass such information, may facilitate the decision-making process Evidence
by lowering decisional conflict, improving level of knowledge, improving satisfaction and level 1
increasing the perception of having made an informed choice.6066
Documentation of the counselling process (for example, using a standardised VBAC checklist or
clinical care pathway) and provision of a patient information leaflet67 are recommended.6062,68 Evidence
level 1+
An example checklist is provided in Appendix IV.
7.2 What are the risks and benefits of planned VBAC versus ERCS from 39 +0 weeks of
gestation?
Women should be made aware that successful VBAC has the fewest complications and therefore
the chance of VBAC success or failure is an important consideration when choosing the mode of
B
delivery.
Women should be made aware that the greatest risk of adverse outcome occurs in a trial of VBAC
resulting in emergency caesarean delivery.
B
Women should be informed that planned VBAC is associated with an approximately 1 in 200 (0.5%)
risk of uterine rupture.
B
Women should be informed that the absolute risk of birth-related perinatal death associated with
VBAC is extremely low and comparable to the risk for nulliparous women in labour.
C
Women should be informed that ERCS is associated with a small increased risk of placenta
praevia and/or accreta in future pregnancies and of pelvic adhesions complicating any future
C
abdominopelvic surgery.
The risk of perinatal death with ERCS is extremely low, but there is a small increase in neonatal
respiratory morbidity when ERCS is performed before 39+0 weeks of gestation. The risk of
C
respiratory morbidity can be reduced with a preoperative course of antenatal corticosteroids.
The maternal and fetal risks of planned VBAC and ERCS from 39 +0 weeks of gestation are summarised
in Table 1.
Planned VBAC adverse maternal outcomes

Uterine rupture
The NICHD study18 showed that planned VBAC, compared with ERCS, had a higher risk of
uterine rupture (0.7% versus 0%). The US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
meta-analysis and studies from the UK, Australia and Ireland reported a VBAC uterine rupture
risk of 0.5%,9 0.2%,20 0.33%22 and 0.2%73 respectively. Rates of uterine rupture differ according Evidence
level 2
to whether VBAC labour is spontaneous (0.150.4%), induced (0.541.4%) or augmented
(0.91.91%)18,20,22 (Appendix V). In the UK cohort study, two women with uterine rupture died
(uterine rupture case fatality 1.3%, 95% CI 0.24.5%).20

Table 1. Risks and benefits of opting for VBAC versus ERCS from 39+0 weeks of gestation
Planned VBAC ERCS from 39+0 weeks

Maternal outcomes 7275% chance of successful VBAC. If A
ble to plan a known delivery date in select
successful, shorter hospital stay and recovery. patients. This may however change based
on circumstances surrounding maternal
and fetal wellbeing in the antenatal period.
Approximately 0.5% risk of uterine scar rupture. V
irtually avoids the risk of uterine rupture
If occurs, associated with maternal morbidity (actual risk is extremely low: less than
and fetal morbidity/mortality. 0.02%).
Longer recovery.
R
educes the risk of pelvic organ prolapse
and urinary incontinence in comparison
with number of vaginal births (dose
response effect) at least in the short term.69
O
ption for sterilisation if fertility is no
longer desired. Evidence suggests that the
regret rate is higher and that the failure
rate from sterilisation associated with
pregnancy may be higher than that from an
interval procedure. If sterilisation is to be
performed at the same time as a caesarean
delivery, counselling and agreement
should have been given at least 2 weeks
prior to the procedure.70
Increases likelihood of future vaginal birth. F uture pregnancies likely to require
caesarean delivery, increased risk of
placenta praevia/accreta and adhesions
with successive caesarean deliveries/
abdominal surgery.
Risk of anal sphincter injury in women
undergoing VBAC is 5% and birthweight is
the strongest predictor of this. The rate of
instrumental delivery is also increased up to
39%.71
Risk of maternal death with planned VBAC of R
isk of maternal death with ERCS of
4/100000 (95% CI 1/100000 to 16/100000).9 13/100000 (95% CI 4/100000 to
42/100000).9
Infant outcomes Risk of transient respiratory morbidity of 23%. R

isk of transient respiratory morbidity of
45% (6% risk if delivery performed at 38
instead of 39 weeks). The risk is reduced
with antenatal corticosteroids, but there
are concerns about potential long-term
adverse effects.72
10 per 10000 (0.1%) prospective risk of
antepartum stillbirth beyond 39 +0 weeks
while awaiting spontaneous labour (similar to
nulliparous women).
8 per 10000 (0.08%) risk of hypoxic ischaemic <
1 per 10000 (< 0.01%) risk of delivery-
encephalopathy (HIE). related perinatal death or HIE.
4 per 10000 (0.04%) risk of delivery-related
perinatal death. This is comparable to the risk
for nulliparous women in labour.
The estimates of risk for adverse maternal or fetal events in VBAC are based on women receiving continuous electronic
monitoring during their labour.
Hysterectomy and other morbidities

The rates of hysterectomy, thromboembolic disease, transfusion and endometritis did not
differ significantly between planned VBAC and ERCS according to the AHRQ meta-analysis9 Evidence
level 2+
and another meta-analysis.74 However, the NICHD study showed unsuccessful compared with

successful VBAC increased the risk of uterine rupture (2.3% versus 0.1%), hysterectomy (0.5%
versus 0.1%), transfusion (3.2% versus 1.2%) and endometritis (7.7% versus 1.2%).18 Meta- Evidence
level 2+
analysis has shown that hysterectomy was required in 1433% of uterine rupture cases.9
A review of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network publications75 suggests that, at term,

women undergoing VBAC as compared with ERCS have a significantly greater incidence of Evidence
level 3
blood transfusion (2% versus 1%), but the likelihood of hysterectomy is not increased.
Planned VBAC adverse perinatal outcomes

Antepartum stillbirth
Planned VBAC is associated with an additional 10 per 10000 prospective risk of antepartum
stillbirth beyond 39 +0 weeks of gestation (recommended timing for ERCS delivery) while
awaiting spontaneous labour.76 The pathophysiology of the increased risk of stillbirth Evidence
associated with VBAC is unexplained, but this increased risk is evident in women with level 2
previous caesarean delivery compared with no prior caesarean delivery despite correcting for
gestation and other factors.76,77
Delivery-related perinatal death

In the NICHD study, planned VBAC is associated with a 4 per 10000 risk of term perinatal death
(i.e. intrapartum stillbirth or neonatal death), with around one-third (1.4 per 10000 overall) of deaths
due to uterine rupture.18 In contrast, ERCS is associated with a risk of delivery-related perinatal Evidence
level 2
death of 1 per 10000 or less. The risk of perinatal death arising from uterine rupture during
VBAC was reported as 4.5% in a Dutch population study23 and 216% in the AHRQ meta-analysis.9
Neonatal hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE)

In the NICHD study, HIE affected 8 per 10000 planned VBACs and, of these, 60% of cases Evidence
(7/12) were due to uterine rupture.18 level 2+
ERCS and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes

Maternal mortality
Both the NICHD18 study and AHRQ9 meta-analysis showed an increased risk of maternal
mortality with ERCS compared with planned VBAC (13/100000 versus 4/100000),9 although Evidence
data were conflicting on whether the differences were statistically significant. Absolute risks level 1
are extremely low for either mode of delivery.
Neonatal respiratory morbidity

ERCS compared with planned VBAC increased the risks of transient tachypnoea of the newborn
(45% versus 23%) and respiratory distress syndrome (0.5% versus less than 0.05%).9,18,7881 Evidence
The Antenatal Steroids for Term Elective Caesarean Section (ASTECS) trial82 reported that level 2+
respiratory morbidity was 11.4%, 6.2% and 1.5% at 37, 38 and 39 weeks of gestation respectively.
Long-term outcomes of planned VBAC versus ERCS

There are no data reporting on long-term maternal or infant outcomes of planned VBAC versus
ERCS cohort groups.9 There are considerable data to show that repeated ERCS is associated Evidence
with an increased risk of placenta praevia, placenta accreta and surgical complications at the level 2
time of subsequent pregnancy and delivery, such as hysterectomy.1113,44,45,52,53
Perinatal outcomes of planned VBAC versus ERCS

The NICHD observational study showed that there was around a three-fold increase (0.38%
versus 0.13%, OR 2.90, 95% CI 1.744.81) for one or more serious composite adverse perinatal Evidence
outcomes (which include perinatal mortality and HIE) for planned VBAC at term compared level 2
with ERCS. Another prospective cohort study in Australia used a broader composite of adverse

perinatal outcomes (perinatal mortality, HIE, neonatal intensive care unit admission, neonatal
acidosis, birth trauma, neonatal sepsis) and also found an approximately three-fold risk for Evidence
level 2
women attempting VBAC.19
A review of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network publications75 suggests that, at term,

in women undergoing VBAC as compared with ERCS, there were similar rates of neonatal Evidence
level 3
seizures and perinatal mortality.
Summary of outcomes of planned VBAC versus ERCS

A reasonable summary of the evidence is that planned VBAC exposes the woman to a very low
(0.25%) additional risk for experiencing perinatal mortality or serious neonatal morbidity and
an additional 1.5% risk of any significant morbidity compared with opting for ERCS from 39 +0 Evidence
weeks of gestation. Nevertheless, it may be helpful to emphasise to women that the absolute level 2+
risk of delivery-related perinatal death associated with VBAC is extremely low (4 per 10000
[0.04%]) and comparable to the risk for nulliparous women in labour.83,84
Cochrane reviews8587 suggest that there are benefits and risks associated with planned ERCS
and planned induction of labour in women with a prior caesarean delivery. There is a paucity of
randomised controlled trials that would provide the most reliable evidence and help women to Evidence
make an informed choice. The related evidence for the established care pathways is potentially level 1++
biased, as it is drawn from nonrandomised studies. Hence, the results and conclusions should
be interpreted with caution and the uncertainties should be discussed with women.
7.3 What is the likelihood of VBAC success?

Women should be informed that the success rate of planned VBAC is 7275%.
C
Meta-analysis (n = 103 188 VBAC labours) reported a pooled VBAC labour success rate of
88,89
74% (95% CI 7275%), while the NICHD study reported a 73% VBAC labour success rate (n =
17898 VBAC labours). A recent Australian cohort trial reported a VBAC success rate of 43%
(535/1237 planned VBAC at 37 weeks), although excluding those women who required elective
caesarean after opting for VBAC, the study showed a VBAC success rate of 59% (535/903 VBAC Evidence
level 2+
labours).19 There are often differences in VBAC success rates between centres and published
studies, so consideration should be given to counselling women using locally derived VBAC
success rates given the pragmatic differences in population, induction/non-induction VBAC
policies and healthcare provision.
7.4 What factors determine the individualised likelihood of VBAC success?

Women with one or more previous vaginal births should be informed that previous vaginal delivery,
C
particularly previous VBAC, is the single best predictor of successful VBAC and is associated with a
planned VBAC success rate of 8590%. Previous vaginal delivery is also independently associated
with a reduced risk of uterine rupture.
Several pre-admission- and admission-based multivariate models have been published to

predict the individualised likelihood of VBAC success.9093 Importantly, women at increased
risk of unsuccessful VBAC are also at increased risk of uterine rupture, including catastrophic
rupture leading to perinatal death.92,9496 Research is exploring the value of transvaginal/
Evidence
transabdominal ultrasonographic assessment of myometrial scar thickness to predict VBAC level 2
success and uterine scar rupture (see section 6.4).57,59,9799 Although prediction models ought to
be intuitively beneficial, such models have not been routinely applied in the decision-making
process and their precise role is yet to be established. A 2013 meta-analysis of these studies has
concluded that further prospective research is required.59

A VBAC score100 has been used by some authors to predict the success of women attempting
VBAC. The retrospective VBAC score was created by examining five features: admission
Bishop score, age, previous caesarean delivery indication, body mass index (BMI) and previous Evidence
vaginal birth. The higher the VBAC score, the higher the success rate; the success rate of level 2
women with a VBAC score of more than 16 was greater than 85%, in contrast to those with a
VBAC score of 10 who had a 49% success rate.
The use of specific population-based models to predict VBAC success needs further data,101,102 Evidence
although initial results are promising. level 2+
Induced labour, no previous vaginal delivery, BMI greater than 30 and previous caesarean
for labour dystocia are associated with an increased risk of unsuccessful VBAC. If all of these
factors are present, successful VBAC is achieved in 40% of cases.18,103
Previous vaginal delivery, particularly previous successful VBAC, is the single best predictor
for successful VBAC and is associated with a planned VBAC success rate of 8590%.103 Previous
vaginal delivery is also independently associated with a reduced risk of uterine rupture.54,96,104,105
Greater maternal height, maternal age less than 40 years, BMI less than 30, gestation of less
than 40 weeks and infant birthweight less than 4 kg (or similar/lower birthweight than index
caesarean delivery106) are associated with an increased likelihood of successful VBAC.90,93,107110
In addition, spontaneous onset of labour, vertex presentation, fetal head engagement or a
lower station, and higher admission Bishop score also increase the likelihood of successful
VBAC.91,94,103,108,111 Successful VBAC is more likely among women with previous caesarean for
fetal malpresentation (84%) compared with women with previous caesarean for either labour
dystocia (64%) or fetal distress (73%) indications.18,103 Younger women and those of white Evidence
level 2
ethnicity experienced the highest success rate, in contrast to women of black ethnicity who
experienced a lower success rate. Those who had an emergency caesarean delivery in their
first birth also had a lower VBAC success rate, in particular those who experienced a failed
induction of labour.112 Despite a degree of data inconsistency, successful VBAC appears more
likely among women with previous caesarean for dystocia at 8 cm or more compared with
women with previous caesarean for dystocia at less than 8 cm.113115 A retrospective study
concluded that the success rate for VBAC in women who had a prior caesarean delivery due to
an unsuccessful instrumental delivery was high (61.3%). The risk factors that were associated
with a failed VBAC in these women were occiput posterior position and prolonged second
stage as the indication for instrumental vaginal delivery in the index pregnancy, maternal age
older than 30 years at the time of subsequent delivery and a birthweight in the subsequent
pregnancy that is higher than the birthweight in the index pregnancy. This information and
the risk factors for VBAC failure can be used when counselling these women regarding mode
of delivery in subsequent pregnancy.116
8. Intrapartum management of planned VBAC

8.1 What delivery setting is appropriate for conducting planned VBAC?
Women should be advised that planned VBAC should be conducted in a suitably staffed and
equipped delivery suite with continuous intrapartum care and monitoring with resources available P
for immediate caesarean delivery and advanced neonatal resuscitation.
Women with an unplanned labour and a history of previous caesarean delivery should have a
discussion with an experienced obstetrician to determine feasibility of VBAC. P
Epidural analgesia is not contraindicated in a planned VBAC, although an increasing requirement
for pain relief in labour should raise awareness of the possibility of an impending uterine rupture.
D

Women should be advised to have continuous electronic fetal monitoring for the duration of
planned VBAC, commencing at the onset of regular uterine contractions.
D
There should be continuous monitoring of the labour to ensure prompt identification of maternal or
fetal compromise, labour dystocia or uterine scar rupture. Consequently, all women in established VBAC
labour should receive:
l supportive one-to-one care
l intravenous access with full blood count and blood group and save
l continuous electronic fetal monitoring
l regular monitoring of maternal symptoms and signs
l regular (no less than 4-hourly) assessment of their cervicometric progress in labour.
For all labours, a meta-analysis showed that epidural analgesia increased the risk of second
stage delay and operative instrumental vaginal delivery.117 It is appropriate to consider early
placement of the epidural catheter so that it can be used later for labour analgesia or for
anaesthesia should an operative delivery become necessary.118
One study (NICHD103) suggested that planned VBAC success rates were higher among women
receiving epidural analgesia; two other studies reported the opposite finding.23,54 A recent
casecontrol study showed frequent epidural dosing to be an independent risk factor for
impending uterine rupture in VBAC labour.119 The increasing pain and analgesia requirement
that is likely to precede uterine rupture may explain the association between uterine rupture Evidence
level 3
and increasing epidural dosing in VBAC labour that progresses to uterine rupture.
The presence of any of the features in the list below is suggestive of uterine rupture. Abnormal
cardiotocography (CTG) is the most consistent finding in uterine rupture and is present in
6676% of these events. However, over half of cases present with a combination of findings
(most often abnormal CTG and abdominal pain).20,23,120 The diagnosis is made at emergency
caesarean delivery or postpartum laparotomy. Most uterine ruptures (more than 90%) occur
during labour (the peak incidence being at 45 cm cervical dilatation), with around 18%
occurring in the second stage of labour and 8% being identified post vaginal delivery.23
The clinical features associated with uterine scar rupture include:

l abnormal CTG
l severe abdominal pain, especially if persisting between contractions
l acute onset scar tenderness
l abnormal vaginal bleeding
l haematuria
l cessation of previously efficient uterine activity
l maternal tachycardia, hypotension, fainting or shock
l loss of station of the presenting part
l change in abdominal contour and inability to pick up fetal heart rate at the old
transducer site.
The risk of uterine rupture in an unscarred uterus is extremely rare at 2 per 10000 (0.02%)
deliveries and this risk is mainly confined to multiparous women in labour.20,23,121 The risk of
uterine rupture in planned VBAC is approximately 2050 per 10000 (0.20.5%) and in ERCS
the risk is 2 per 10000 (0.02%) (Appendix V).9,20,22,73 Early diagnosis of uterine scar dehiscence Evidence
or rupture followed by expeditious laparotomy and neonatal resuscitation are essential to level 3
reduce associated morbidity and mortality. An observational study indicated a potential upper
limit for nonhypoxic neonatal delivery of 18 minutes from suspected uterine rupture to
delivery.122 It is important to note that scar dehiscence may be asymptomatic in up to 48% of

women, and the classic triad of a complete uterine rupture (pain, vaginal bleeding, fetal heart Evidence
rate abnormalities) may present in less than 10% of cases.123 level 3
8.2 How should women with a previous caesarean birth be advised in relation to induction
or augmentation of labour?
Women should be informed of the two- to three-fold increased risk of uterine rupture and around
1.5-fold increased risk of caesarean delivery in induced and/or augmented labour compared with
D
spontaneous VBAC labour.
A senior obstetrician should discuss the following with the woman: the decision to induce labour,
the proposed method of induction, the decision to augment labour with oxytocin, the time intervals P
for serial vaginal examination and the selected parameters of progress that would necessitate
discontinuing VBAC.
Clinicians should be aware that induction of labour using mechanical methods (amniotomy or
Foley catheter) is associated with a lower risk of scar rupture compared with induction using
D
prostaglandins.
Although induction and augmentation are not contraindicated in women with previous
caesarean delivery, there remains considerable disagreement among clinicians on their use.
Induction (particularly in women with an unfavourable cervix or by prostaglandin method) or
augmentation of VBAC labour are associated with a two- to three-fold increased risk of uterine
rupture and around a 1.5-fold increased risk of caesarean delivery compared with spontaneous
VBAC labour (Appendix V). Studies evaluating oxytocin use in VBAC labour have not recorded
the indication for oxytocin use. However, it would seem plausible to assume that uterine Evidence
level 3
rupture would be more likely to occur if oxytocin was used to overcome delayed progress
when uterine activity appeared to be adequate (appropriate strength/frequency uterine
contractions) compared with when uterine activity was absent or inadequate (infrequent/
weak strength contractions). Furthermore, a casecontrol study has shown that utilising
higher dose oxytocin (exceeding 20 milliunits/minute) during VBAC augmentation increases
the risk of uterine rupture by four-fold or greater.124,125
The decision to induce or augment VBAC labour should be determined following careful obstetric
assessment and be made by senior obstetricians in consultation with the women. As part of informed
consent, women should be made aware of the increased risks (uterine rupture and emergency caesarean
delivery) associated with induction and/or augmentation of VBAC labour, and of the alternative option of
caesarean delivery. Women who are contemplating many future pregnancies may be prepared to accept
the additional risks associated with induction and/or augmentation in an effort to avoid the potential
long-term surgical risks associated with multiple repeat caesarean deliveries.
Women with previous caesarean delivery who have not previously given birth vaginally
and those who have labour induced with prostaglandins are at increased risk of uterine
rupture and the same two factors are associated with an increased risk of perinatal death
due to uterine rupture.105 In the NICHD study,18 prostaglandin induction compared with non-
prostaglandin induction (e.g. amniotomy or intracervical Foley catheter) was associated with
a higher uterine rupture risk (87 per 10000 [0.87%] versus 29 per 10000 [0.29%]) and a Evidence
level 3
higher risk of perinatal death due to uterine rupture (11.2 per 10000 [0.11%] versus 4.5 per
10000 [0.045%]). Hence, careful consideration should be given to using prostaglandins and,
if prostaglandins are to be used, to restricting the dose of total prostaglandin exposure in
accordance with locally agreed guidelines, or considering another method of induction, such
as an intracervical Foley catheter.126

Two retrospective studies127,128 have suggested that low-dose prostaglandin E2 is a safe option
for induction of labour in women undergoing VBAC, with no appreciable increase in rates of
uterine rupture or maternal and perinatal mortality when compared with women undergoing Evidence
a spontaneous VBAC. However, a Cochrane review129 suggested that there is insufficient level 2
evidence from randomised controlled trials to determine the lowest risk method of induction
of labour with a previous caesarean delivery.
9. Planning and conducting ERCS

9.1 What elements are involved in the perioperative, intraoperative and postoperative care
for ERCS?
ERCS delivery should be conducted after 39+0 weeks of gestation.
A
Antibiotics should be administered before making the skin incision in women undergoing ERCS.
B
All women undergoing ERCS should receive thromboprophylaxis according to existing RCOG guidelines.
P
Early recognition of placenta praevia, adopting a multidisciplinary approach and informed consent
are important considerations in the management of women with placenta praevia and previous P
caesarean delivery.
Recommended practice relating to planning and conducting ERCS is provided in the NICE caesarean
section guideline.6 In addition to standard perioperative measures for conducting ERCS, there are further
specific issues that warrant discussion.
Women considering ERCS should be counselled that delaying delivery by 1 week from 38 +0 to
39 +0 weeks enables around a 5% reduction (6% versus 1%) in the risk of respiratory morbidity
(particularly reducing the risk of transient tachypnoea of the newborn),7881,130 but this delay
may be associated with a 5 per 10000 (0.05%) increase in the risk of antepartum stillbirth.76
Should there be a need to perform ERCS prior to 39 weeks, consideration should be given to
administering maternal corticosteroids.6,130 A randomised controlled trial demonstrated a 50%
reduction in respiratory morbidity by administering prophylactic betamethasone to women
having elective caesarean deliveries beyond 37+0 weeks (steroid versus control 2.4% versus
5.1%; relative risk 0.46, 95% CI 0.230.93) and this treatment effect was still apparent at 39 +0
weeks of gestation (steroid versus control, 0.6% versus 1.5%).82
However, the current RCOG Green-top Guideline on antenatal corticosteroids130 raises a

caution that there is an absence of evidence available for the safety of antenatal corticosteroids
in babies born after 36 +0 weeks of gestation; some research suggests the existence of potential Evidence
long-term adverse effects in infants of mothers who received antenatal corticosteroids.72,131 level 1+
A follow-up study from the trial of steroids prior to term caesarean delivery demonstrated
no long-term benefit of steroids, but found that glucocorticoid-exposed children were twice
as likely to be identified as being in the lowest achievement group at school compared with
controls (33/186 [17.7%] versus 14/164 [8.5%] respectively, relative risk 2.1, 95% CI 1.13.7, P =
0.01).132 These issues should be discussed with women prior to the use of steroids and efforts
should be directed to avoiding ERCS prior to 39 +0 weeks rather than a more liberal use of
earlier delivery and antenatal steroids.
Perioperative preincision antibiotics achieve a greater reduction in the risk of maternal infection
than prophylactic antibiotics administered after making the skin incision. No detrimental effects
on the baby have been demonstrated. Ideally, the chosen antibiotic should protect against
endometritis and urinary tract and wound infections: i.e. cefuroxime and metronidazole.6

Concerns about the use of co-amoxiclav in pregnancy were raised by the Overview of the Role
of Antibiotics in Curtailing Labour and Early Delivery (ORACLE) studies, which demonstrated an
increased incidence of necrotising enterocolitis when it was given in preterm prelabour rupture
of membranes133 and a nonsignificant increase when used during spontaneous preterm labour.134 Evidence
level 1+
Extrapolating from these data, the NICE Guideline Development Group advise against its use as
prophylaxis before skin incision or before cord clamping at the time of caesarean delivery, citing
a hypothetical increased risk of necrotising enterocolitis by fetal exposure to co-amoxiclav.135
The choice of method of thromboprophylaxis should be as per the RCOG guidance.136
The RCOG has published guidance on the diagnosis and management of placenta praevia in Evidence
level 4
association with a caesarean delivery and placenta accreta45 and its recommendations should
be followed in women with a previous caesarean delivery and placenta praevia.
10. How should women in special circumstances be cared for?

Clinicians should be aware that there is uncertainty about the safety and efficacy of planned
VBAC in pregnancies complicated by post-dates, twin gestation, fetal macrosomia, antepartum P
stillbirth or maternal age of 40 years or more. Hence, a cautious approach is advised if VBAC is
being considered in such circumstances.
Women who are preterm and considering the options for birth after a previous caesarean delivery
should be informed that planned preterm VBAC has similar success rates to planned term VBAC but
B
with a lower risk of uterine rupture.
41+0 weeks of gestation

The NICE induction of labour guideline recommends induction of labour from 41+0 weeks as
this reduces perinatal mortality without an increase in caesarean delivery rates.137 There are
no adequate data to recommend whether such an approach is equally valid in women with
previous caesarean delivery. The risk of stillbirth at or after 39 weeks is between 1.5- and
two-fold higher in women with previous caesarean delivery compared with women without Evidence
previous caesarean delivery (absolute risks 11 per 10000 [0.11%] versus 5 per 10000 [0.05%]).76 level 3
Hence, the reduction in risk of perinatal death that occurs by delivering from 41 weeks is likely
to be greater among women with previous caesarean delivery. However, in such women,
induction of labour compared with spontaneous labour is associated with increased risks of
emergency caesarean delivery (by 1.5-fold) and uterine scar rupture (by two- to three-fold).
A reasonable approach would be for women who planned VBAC to have a review by a senior obstetrician
at 41+0 weeks of gestation if spontaneous onset of labour has not ensued (Appendix II). Such a review
should assess her likelihood of successful VBAC (for example, favourable cervix, previous vaginal
birth, absence of any obstetric or fetal complications), her understanding of the increased maternal and
perinatal risks if induction is chosen, her preference for membrane sweep, spontaneous VBAC, induced
(amniotomy or prostaglandin) VBAC or ERCS, and her future reproductive preferences. In practice, this
may mean scheduling a provisional ERCS at around 40 +10 weeks and converting to induction of labour
depending on further clinical and cervical assessment at 40 +10 weeks.
Twin gestation
Various studies, including the NICHD study (n = 186 twin pregnancies)138 and three US
retrospective studies (n = 535,139 n = 1850,140 n = 25141 twin pregnancies), have reported similar Evidence
level 3
successful rates of VBAC in twin pregnancies (4584%) to those in singleton pregnancies.

Suspected fetal macrosomia
In relation to VBAC labour, birthweight of 4 kg or more is associated with an increased
risk of uterine rupture (OR 2.62, 95% CI 1.0016.85), unsuccessful VBAC (OR 2.47, 95% CI
1.823.34), shoulder dystocia (OR 25.13, 95% CI 9.3167.86) and third- and fourth-degree
perineal laceration (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.664.19).110 For women with no prior vaginal delivery
undergoing VBAC labour when neonatal birthweight was 4 kg or higher, the VBAC success Evidence
rate was reported as less than 50% and the uterine rupture rate was 3.6%.142 A subgroup level 2
analysis of the NICHD study showed that, among women with previous caesarean delivery
for dystocia, greater birthweight in the subsequent planned VBAC labour (relative to the first
birthweight) was associated with a decreased likelihood of successful VBAC.108 However, third
trimester ultrasound is a poor predictor of macrosomia in decision making regarding VBAC.
Antepartum stillbirth
Women with an antepartum stillbirth and a previous caesarean delivery undergo labour with
a high VBAC success rate (87%). The care of these women should be in line with national Evidence
guidelines.143 However, because a proportion of cases required induction and/or augmentation, level 3
one study reported a uterine rupture rate of 2.4%.144
Maternal age of 40 years or more

Maternal age of 40 years or more is an independent risk factor for stillbirth145 and unsuccessful
VBAC.103,146,147 Published advice suggests consideration of delivery of women aged 40 years
or more by 39 +040 +0 weeks to reduce the risk of adverse perinatal outcome (particularly
stillbirth).145 However, given the likely additive effects of previous caesarean delivery and Evidence
level 4
raised maternal age on the risk of stillbirth, careful consideration should be given to the
timing of the delivery in women aged 40 years or above who plan VBAC. There is insufficient
evidence to recommend optimum timing of delivery in this subgroup of women.
Preterm VBAC
The NICHD study showed planned VBAC success rates for preterm and term pregnancies
were similar (72.8% versus 73.3%). However, the rates of uterine rupture (34 per 10000 versus
74 per 10000 respectively) and dehiscence (26 per 10000 versus 67 per 10000 respectively) Evidence
level 2
were significantly lower in preterm compared with term VBAC.148 Perinatal outcomes were
similar with preterm VBAC and preterm ERCS.
11. Recommendations for future research
l Development, validation and pragmatic clinical evaluation of an antenatal- and/or intrapartum-

based scoring system to identify women at high or low risk of unsuccessful VBAC.
l Determine the clinical value of antenatal and intrapartum ultrasound to predict the likelihood of
successful VBAC or uterine rupture using specific (e.g. ultrasonographically measured myometrial
scar thickness) or combination parameters.
l Investigate the aetiology and prevention (e.g. specific antenatal monitoring strategies, timing
of delivery) of the increased risk of stillbirth in women with previous caesarean delivery in the
presence or absence of other previous complications (e.g. pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery, small
for gestational age).
l Investigate cervicometric progress in VBAC labour and determine the value of timing interventions
to maximise VBAC success and minimise uterine rupture.
l Research into factors that may explain the regional and unit-based variation in uptake of VBAC
and the factors that impact most on women accepting or declining VBAC (e.g. patient information

leaflet, previous childbirth experiences, desired family size, understanding the risk analysis during
counselling, how to reduce any decisional conflict, variation in case mix).
l Investigate the use of mechanical dilators for induction of VBAC labour.
12. Auditable topics
l Documented discussion of risks and benefits of VBAC versus ERCS/use of VBAC checklists (100%).
l Proportions of women experiencing successful versus unsuccessful spontaneous and induced
planned VBAC (particularly with reference to the induction method).
l 100% reporting of serious maternal (e.g. uterine rupture, peripartum hysterectomy, mortality) and
neonatal (e.g. antepartum stillbirth, HIE, intrapartum and neonatal mortality) morbidity/mortality
consequent to VBAC versus ERCS via a local incident reporting system.
l Effectiveness of antenatal screening for placenta praevia and accreta, including frequency of
missed antenatal diagnoses against locally agreed standards.
l Use of continuous electronic fetal monitoring during VBAC labour (100%).
l Documentation of senior obstetrician involvement in induction and augmentation of VBAC
labour (100%).
13. Useful links and support groups
l Caesarean Birth and VBAC Information [http://caesarean.org.uk].

l Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth after a caesarean section: Information
for you. London: RCOG; 2015.
References
1. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth 9. Guise JM, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA, Marshall N, Fu R, et al.
After Previous Caesarean Birth. Green-top Guideline No. Vaginal Birth After Cesarean: New Insights. Evidence Reports/
45. London: RCOG; 2007. Technology Assessments, No. 191. Rockville, Maryland, USA:
2. Health and Social Care Information Centre. NHS Maternity Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2010.
Statistics - England, April 2012 to March 2013: Provider 10. Fawsitt CG, Bourke J, Greene RA, Everard CM, Murphy A,
level analysis. [Leeds]: HSCIC; 2013 [http://www.hscic. Lutomski JE. At what price? A cost-effectiveness analysis
gov.uk/catalogue/PUB12744]. Accessed 2015 Mar 18. comparing trial of labour after previous caesarean versus
3. Welsh Government. Maternity Statistics, Wales: elective repeat caesarean delivery. PLoS One 2013;8:e58577.
Method of Delivery, 2004-2014. SDR 210/2014. Cardiff: 11. Eshkoli T, Weintraub AY, Sergienko R, Sheiner E.
Welsh Government; 2014 [http://gov.wales/docs/ Placenta accreta: risk factors, perinatal outcomes, and
statistics/2014/141202-maternity-method-delivery-2014-en. consequences for subsequent births. Am J Obstet Gynecol
pdf]. Accessed 2015 Mar 18. 2013;208:219.e17.
4. Department of Health, Social Services & Public Safety. 12. Cook JR, Jarvis S, Knight M, Dhanjal MK. Multiple repeat
Northern Ireland Hospital Statistics: Inpatient and Day caesarean section in the UK: incidence and consequences
Case Activity Statistics 2012/13. Belfast: DHSSPS; 2013 to mother and child. A national, prospective, cohort study.
[http://www.dhsspsni.gov.uk/index/statistics/hospital_ BJOG 2013;120:8591.
statistics_-_inpatient_and_day_case_activity_2012-13. 13. Fitzpatrick KE, Sellers S, Spark P, Kurinczuk JJ, Brocklehurst
pdf]. Accessed 2015 Mar 18. P, Knight M. Incidence and risk factors for placenta accreta/
5. Information Services Division, NHS National Services increta/percreta in the UK: a national case-control study.
Scotland. Births in Scottish Hospitals. Edinburgh; PLoS One 2012;7:e52893.
Information Services Division, NHS National Services 14. Marshall NE, Fu R, Guise JM. Impact of multiple cesarean
Scotland; 2014 [https://isdscotland.scot.nhs.uk/Health- deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review. Am
Topics /Mater n it y-and-Bir ths / Publications /2014 - 08 - J Obstet Gynecol 2011;205:262.e18.
26/2014-08-26-Births-Report.pdf?83330935240]. Accessed 15. Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Thom
2015 Mar 18. EA, et al.; National Institute of Child Health and Human
6. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Development MaternalFetal Medicine Units Network.
Caesarean section. NICE clinical guideline 132. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat
Manchester: NICE; 2011. cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:122632.
7. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. 16. Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Huertas E, Guise JM, Horey D.
ACOG Practice bulletin no. 115: Vaginal birth after previous Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned
cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:45063. vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth.
8. Cunningham FG, Bangdiwala SI, Brown SS, Dean TM, Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;(4):CD004224.
Frederiksen M, Rowland Hogue CJ, et al. NIH consensus 17. Dodd JM, Crowther CA. Elective repeat caesarean
development conference draft statement on vaginal birth section versus induction of labour for women with a
after cesarean: new insights. NIH Consens State Sci previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Statements 2010;27(3). 2012;(5):CD004906.

18. Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, Leindecker 36. Makino S, Tanaka T, Itoh S, Kumakiri J, Takeuchi H,
S, Varner MW, et al.; National Institute of Child Health Takeda S. Prospective comparison of delivery outcomes of
and Human Development MaternalFetal Medicine Units vaginal births after cesarean section versus laparoscopic
Network. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with myomectomy. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2008;34:9526.
a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 37. Kumakiri J, Takeuchi H, Itoh S, Kitade M, Kikuchi I,
2004;351:25819. Shimanuki H, et al. Prospective evaluation for the feasibility
19. Crowther CA, Dodd JM, Hiller JE, Haslam RR, Robinson and safety of vaginal birth after laparoscopic myomectomy.
JS; Birth After Caesarean Study Group. Planned vaginal J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2008;15:4204.
birth or elective repeat caesarean: patient preference 38. Gavai M, Berkes E, Lazar L, Fekete T, Takacs ZF, Urbancsek
restricted cohort with nested randomised trial. PLoS Med J, et al. Factors affecting reproductive outcome following
2012;9:e1001192. abdominal myomectomy. J Assist Reprod Genet
20. Fitzpatrick KE, Kurinczuk JJ, Alfirevic Z, Spark P, 2007;24:52531.
Brocklehurst P, Knight M. Uterine rupture by intended 39. Kumakiri J, Takeuchi H, Kitade M, Kikuchi I, Shimanuki
mode of delivery in the UK: a national case-control study. H, Itoh S, et al. Pregnancy and delivery after laparoscopic
PLoS Med 2012;9:e1001184. myomectomy. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2005;12:2416.
21. Stock SJ, Ferguson E, Duffy A, Ford I, Chalmers J, Norman 40. Campo S, Campo V, Gambadauro P. Reproductive outcome
JE. Outcomes of induction of labour in women with before and after laparoscopic or abdominal myomectomy
previous caesarean delivery: a retrospective cohort study for subserous or intramural myomas. Eur J Obstet Gynecol
using a population database. PLoS One 2013;8:e60404. Reprod Biol 2003;110:2159.
22. Dekker GA, Chan A, Luke CG, Priest K, Riley M, Halliday 41. Seracchioli R, Manuzzi L, Vianello F, Gualerzi B, Savelli
J, et al. Risk of uterine rupture in Australian women L, Paradisi R, et al. Obstetric and delivery outcome of
attempting vaginal birth after one prior caesarean section: pregnancies achieved after laparoscopic myomectomy.
a retrospective population-based cohort study. BJOG Fertil Steril 2006;86:15965.
2010;117:135865. 42. Shokeir T, Abdelshaheed M, El-Shafie M, Sherif L, Badawy
23. Zwart JJ, Richters JM, Ory F, de Vries JI, Bloemenkamp A. Determinants of fertility and reproductive success after
KW, van Roosmalen J. Uterine rupture in The Netherlands: hysteroscopic septoplasty for women with unexplained
a nationwide population-based cohort study. BJOG primary infertility: a prospective analysis of 88 cases. Eur J
2009;116:106978; discussion 107880. Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011;155:547.
24. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 43. Nouri K, Ott J, Huber JC, Fischer EM, Stgbauer L, Tempfer
Antenatal care. NICE clinical guideline 62. [Manchester]: CB. Reproductive outcome after hysteroscopic septoplasty
NICE; 2008. in patients with septate uterus - a retrospective cohort
25. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Planning study and systematic review of the literature. Reprod Biol
the mode of birth. NICE Pathway. Manchester: NICE: 2011 Endocrinol 2010;8:52.
[http://pathways.nice.org.uk/pathways/caesarean-section/ 44. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Placenta
planning-the-mode-of-birth]. Accessed 2014 Jul 25. Praevia, Placenta Praevia Accreta and Vasa Praevia:
26. Schoorel EN, Vankan E, Scheepers HC, Augustijn BC, Diagnosis and Management. Green-top Guideline No. 27.
Dirksen CD, de Koning M, et al. Involving women in London: RCOG; 2011.
personalised decision-making on mode of delivery after 45. Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell DA, Edozien LC, Smith GC,
caesarean section: the development and pilot testing of a Onwere C, Mahmood TA, et al. Risk of placenta previa in
patient decision aid. BJOG 2014;121:2029. second birth after first birth cesarean section: a population-
27. Gardner K, Henry A, Thou S, Davis G, Miller T. Improving based study and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
VBAC rates: the combined impact of two management 2011;11:95.
strategies. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2014;54:32732. 46. Landon MB, Spong CY, Thom E, Hauth JC, Bloom SL, Varner
28. Al Qahtani NH, Al Hajeri F. Pregnancy outcome and MW, et al.; National Institute of Child Health and Human
fertility after complete uterine rupture: a report of 20 Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network.
pregnancies and a review of literature. Arch Gynecol Risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor in women with
Obstet 2011;284:11236. multiple and single prior cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol
29. Chibber R, El-Saleh E, Al Fadhli R, Al Jassar W, Al Harmi J. 2006;108:1220.
Uterine rupture and subsequent pregnancy outcome how 47. Macones GA, Cahill A, Pare E, Stamilio DM, Ratcliffe
safe is it? A 25-year study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med S, Stevens E, et al. Obstetric outcomes in women with
2010;23:4214. two prior cesarean deliveries: is vaginal birth after
30. Reyes-Ceja L, Cabrera R, Insfran E, Herrera-Lasso F. cesarean delivery a viable option? Am J Obstet Gynecol
Pregnancy following previous uterine rupture. Study of 19 2005;192:12238; discussion 12289.
patients. Obstet Gynecol 1969;34:3879. 48. Miller DA, Diaz FG, Paul RH. Vaginal birth after cesarean: a
31. Naef RW 3rd, Ray MA, Chauhan SP, Roach H, Blake PG, 10-year experience. Obstet Gynecol 1994;84:2558.
Martin JN Jr. Trial of labor after cesarean delivery with a 49. Caughey AB, Shipp TD, Repke JT, Zelop CM, Cohen A,
lower-segment, vertical uterine incision: is it safe? Am J Lieberman E. Rate of uterine rupture during a trial of labor
Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:166673; discussion 16734. in women with one or two prior cesarean deliveries. Am J
32. Shipp TD, Zelop CM, Repke JT, Cohen A, Caughey AB, Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:8726.
Lieberman E. Intrapartum uterine rupture and dehiscence 50. Spaans WA, van der Vliet LM, Rell-Schorer EA, Bleker OP,
in patients with prior lower uterine segment vertical and van Roosmalen J. Trial of labour after two or three previous
transverse incisions. Obstet Gynecol 1999;94:73540. caesarean sections. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
33. Greene RA, Fitzpatrick C, Turner MJ. What are the maternal 2003;110:169.
implications of a classical caesarean section? J Obstet 51. Tahseen S, Griffiths M. Vaginal birth after two caesarean
Gynaecol 1998;18:3457. sections (VBAC-2)a systematic review with meta-analysis
34. Rovio PH, Heinonen PK. Pregnancy outcomes after of success rate and adverse outcomes of VBAC-2 versus VBAC-
transvaginal myomectomy by colpotomy. Eur J Obstet 1 and repeat (third) caesarean sections. BJOG 2010;117:519.
Gynecol Reprod Biol 2012;161:1303. 52. Kamara M, Henderson JJ, Doherty DA, Dickinson JE,
35. Parker WH, Einarsson J, Istre O, Dubuisson JB. Risk factors Pennell CE. The risk of placenta accreta following primary
for uterine rupture after laparoscopic myomectomy. J elective caesarean delivery: a case-control study. BJOG
Minim Invasive Gynecol 2010;17:5514. 2013;120:87986.

53. Grobman WA, Gersnoviez R, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno 71. Hehir MP, Fitzpatrick M, Cassidy M, Murphy M, OHerlihy
KJ, Rouse DJ, et al.; National Institute of Child Health and C. Are women having a vaginal birth after a previous
Human Development (NICHD) MaternalFetal Medicine caesarean delivery at increased risk of anal sphincter
Units (MFMU) Network. Pregnancy outcomes for women injury? BJOG 2014;121:151520.
with placenta previa in relation to the number of prior 72. Aiken CE, Fowden AL, Smith GC. Antenatal glucocorticoids
cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:124955. prior to cesarean delivery at term. JAMA Pediatr
54. Barger MK, Weiss J, Nannini A, Werler M, Heeren T, 2014;168:5078.
Stubblefield PG. Risk factors for uterine rupture among 73. Turner MJ, Agnew G, Langan H. Uterine rupture and labour
women who attempt a vaginal birth after a previous cesarean: after a previous low transverse caesarean section. BJOG
a case-control study. J Reprod Med 2011;56:31320. 2006;113:72932.
55. Weimar CH, Lim AC, Bots ML, Bruinse HW, Kwee A. Risk 74. Rossi AC, DAddario V. Maternal morbidity following a trial
factors for uterine rupture during a vaginal birth after one of labor after cesarean section vs elective repeat cesarean
previous caesarean section: a case-control study. Eur J delivery: a systematic review with metaanalysis. Am J
Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010;151:415. Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:22431.
56. Bujold E, Gauthier RJ. Risk of uterine rupture associated 75. Hammad IA, Chauhan SP, Magann EF, Abuhamad AZ.
with an interdelivery interval between 18 and 24 months. Peripartum complications with cesarean delivery: a review
Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:10036. of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network publications. J
57. Bergeron ME, Jastrow N, Brassard N, Paris G, Bujold Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2014;27:46374.
E. Sonography of lower uterine segment thickness 76. Smith GC, Pell JP, Dobbie R. Caesarean section and risk
and prediction of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol of unexplained stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy. Lancet
2009;113:5202. 2003;362:177984.
58. Kessous R, Sheiner E. Is there an association between 77. Gray R, Quigley MA, Hockley C, Kurinczuk JJ, Goldacre M,
short interval from previous cesarean section and adverse Brocklehurst P. Caesarean delivery and risk of stillbirth in
obstetric and perinatal outcome? J Matern Fetal Neonatal subsequent pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study in an
Med 2013;26:10036. English population. BJOG 2007;114:26470.
59. Kok N, Wiersma IC, Opmeer BC, de Graaf IM, Mol BW, 78. Go MD, Emeis C, Guise JM, Schelonka RL. Fetal and
Pajkrt E. Sonographic measurement of lower uterine neonatal morbidity and mortality following delivery after
segment thickness to predict uterine rupture during a trial previous cesarean. Clin Perinatol 2011;38:3119.
of labor in women with previous Cesarean section: a meta- 79. Kamath BD, Todd JK, Glazner JE, Lezotte D, Lynch AM.
analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;42:1329. Neonatal outcomes after elective cesarean delivery. Obstet
60. Say R, Robson S, Thomson R. Helping pregnant women make Gynecol 2009;113:12318.
better decisions: a systematic review of the benefits of patient 80. Richardson BS, Czikk MJ, daSilva O, Natale R. The impact
decision aids in obstetrics. BMJ Open 2011;1:e000261. of labor at term on measures of neonatal outcome. Am J
61. Emmett CL, Montgomery AA, Murphy DJ; DiAMOND Study Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:21926.
Group. Preferences for mode of delivery after previous 81. Zanardo V, Simbi AK, Franzoi M, Sold G, Salvadori A,
caesarean section: what do women want, what do they Trevisanuto D. Neonatal respiratory morbidity risk and
get and how do they value outcomes? Health Expect mode of delivery at term: influence of timing of elective
2011;14:397404. caesarean delivery. Acta Paediatr 2004;93:6437.
62. Veltman L. Vaginal birth after cesarean checklist: an 82. Stutchfield P, Whitaker R, Russell I; Antenatal Steroids
evidence-based approach to improving care during VBAC for Term Elective Caesarean Section (ASTECS) Research
trials. J Healthc Risk Manag 2009;29:227. Team. Antenatal betamethasone and incidence of neonatal
63. Frost J, Shaw A, Montgomery A, Murphy DJ. Womens views respiratory distress after elective caesarean section:
on the use of decision aids for decision making about the pragmatic randomised trial. BMJ 2005;331:662.
method of delivery following a previous caesarean section: 83. Smith GC, Pell JP, Cameron AD, Dobbie R. Risk of perinatal
qualitative interview study. BJOG 2009;116:896905. death associated with labor after previous cesarean
64. Montgomery AA, Emmett CL, Fahey T, Jones C, Ricketts I, delivery in uncomplicated term pregnancies. JAMA
Patel RR, et al.; DiAMOND Study Group. Two decision aids 2002;287:268490.
for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean 84. Smith GC. Life-table analysis of the risk of perinatal death at
section: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007;334:1305. term and post term in singleton pregnancies. Am J Obstet
65. Moffat MA, Bell JS, Porter MA, Lawton S, Hundley V, Gynecol 2001;184:48996.
Danielian P, et al. Decision making about mode of 85. Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Grivell RM, Deussen AR. Elective
delivery among pregnant women who have previously repeat caesarean section versus induction of labour
had a caesarean section: A qualitative study. BJOG for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane
2007;114:8693. Database Syst Rev 2014;(12):CD004906.
66. Law LW, Pang MW, Chung TK, Lao TT, Lee DT, Leung 86. Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Huertas E, Guise JM, Horey D.
TY, et al. Randomised trial of assigned mode of delivery Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned
after a previous cesarean section impact on maternal vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth.
psychological dynamics. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(12):CD004224.
2010;23:110613. 87. Horey D, Kealy M, Davey MA, Small R, Crowther CA.
67. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth Interventions for supporting pregnant womens decision-
after a caesarean section: Information for you. London: making about mode of birth after a caesarean. Cochrane
RCOG; 2015. Database Syst Rev 2013;(7):CD010041.
68. Catling-Paull C, Johnston R, Ryan C, Foureur MJ, Homer 88. Guise JM, Berlin M, McDonagh M, Osterweil P, Chan
CS. Non-clinical interventions that increase the uptake B, Helfand M. Safety of vaginal birth after cesarean: a
and success of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:4209.
systematic review. J Adv Nurs 2011;67:166276. 89. Mozurkewich EL, Hutton EK. Elective repeat cesarean
69. Rrtveit G, Hannestad YS. Association between mode delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature
of delivery and pelvic floor dysfunction. Tidsskr Nor from 1989 to 1999. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000;183:118797.
Laegeforen 2014;134:184852. 90. Chaillet N, Bujold E, Dub E, Grobman WA. Validation of a
70. Faculty of Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare. Male and prediction model for vaginal birth after caesarean. J Obstet
Female Sterilisation. London: FSRH; 2014. Gynaecol Can 2013;35:11924.

91. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet
Rouse DJ, et al. Does information available at admission for Gynecol 2009;114:102933.
delivery improve prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean? 108. Peaceman AM, Gersnoviez R, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno
Am J Perinatol 2009;26:693701. KJ, Varner MW, et al.; National Institute of Child Health
92. Smith GC, White IR, Pell JP, Dobbie R. Predicting cesarean and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units
section and uterine rupture among women attempting Network. The MFMU Cesarean Registry: impact of fetal size
vaginal birth after prior cesarean section. PLoS Med on trial of labor success for patients with previous cesarean
2005;2:e252. for dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;195:112731.
93. Hashima JN, Eden KB, Osterweil P, Nygren P, Guise JM. 109. Stock SJ, Walker J, Cooper S, Norman JE. Effect of birth
Predicting vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a review weight on adverse obstetric outcomes in vaginal birth after
of prognostic factors and screening tools. Am J Obstet cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:1089; author
Gynecol 2004;190:54755. reply 108990.
94. Grivell RM, Barreto MP, Dodd JM. The influence of 110. Jastrow N, Roberge S, Gauthier RJ, Laroche L, Duperron L,
intrapartum factors on risk of uterine rupture and Brassard N, et al. Effect of birth weight on adverse obstetric
successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Clin outcomes in vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet
Perinatol 2011;38:26575. Gynecol 2010;115:33843.
95. Grobman WA. Rates and prediction of successful vaginal 111. Flamm BL, Geiger AM. Vaginal birth after cesarean
birth after cesarean. Semin Perinatol 2010;34:2448. delivery: an admission scoring system. Obstet Gynecol
96. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, 1997;90:90710.
Rouse DJ, et al.; National Institute of Child Health and 112. Knight HE, Gurol-Urganci I, van der Meulen JH, Mahmood TA,
Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Richmond DH, Dougall A, et al. Vaginal birth after caesarean
Network. Prediction of uterine rupture associated with section: a cohort study investigating factors associated with
attempted vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Am J its uptake and success. BJOG 2014;121:18392.
Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:30.e15. 113. Abildgaard H, Ingerslev MD, Nickelsen C, Secher NJ.
97. Naji O, Wynants L, Smith A, Abdallah Y, Stalder C, Sayasneh Cervical dilation at the time of cesarean section for dystocia
A, et al. Predicting successful vaginal birth after Cesarean effect on subsequent trial of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol
section using a model based on Cesarean scar features Scand 2013;92:1937.
examined by transvaginal sonography. Ultrasound Obstet 114. Kwon JY, Jo YS, Lee GS, Kim SJ, Shin JC, Lee Y. Cervical
Gynecol 2013;41:6728. dilatation at the time of cesarean section may affect the
98. Gizzo S, Zambon A, Saccardi C, Patrelli TS, Di Gangi S, success of a subsequent vaginal delivery. J Matern Fetal
Carrozzini M, et al. Effective anatomical and functional Neonatal Med 2009;22:105762.
status of the lower uterine segment at term: estimating 115. Hoskins IA, Gomez JL. Correlation between maximum
the risk of uterine dehiscence by ultrasound. Fertil Steril cervical dilatation at cesarean delivery and subsequent
2013;99:496501. vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol
99. Jastrow N, Gauthier RJ, Gagnon G, Leroux N, Beaudoin F, 1997;89:5913.
Bujold E. Impact of labor at prior cesarean on lower uterine 116. Melamed N, Segev M, Hadar E, Peled Y, Wiznitzer A, Yogev
segment thickness in subsequent pregnancy. Am J Obstet Y. Outcome of trial of labor after cesarean section in
Gynecol 2010;202:563.e17. women with past failed operative vaginal delivery. Am J
100. Metz TD, Stoddard GJ, Henry E, Jackson M, Holmgren C, Obstet Gynecol 2013;209:49.e17.
Esplin S. Simple, validated vaginal birth after cesarean 117. Anim-Somuah M, Smyth RM, Jones L. Epidural versus non-
delivery prediction model for use at the time of admission. epidural or no analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database
Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:5718. Syst Rev 2011;(12):CD000331.
101. Schoorel EN, Melman S, van Kuijk SM, Grobman WA, 118. Scott JR. Intrapartum management of trial of labour
Kwee A, Mol BW, et al. Predicting successful intended after caesarean delivery: evidence and experience. BJOG
vaginal delivery after previous caesarean section: external 2014;121:15762.
validation of two predictive models in a Dutch nationwide 119. Cahill AG, Odibo AO, Allsworth JE, Macones GA. Frequent
registration-based cohort with a high intended vaginal epidural dosing as a marker for impending uterine rupture
delivery rate. BJOG 2014;121:8407. in patients who attempt vaginal birth after cesarean
102. Schoorel EN, van Kuijk SM, Melman S, Nijhuis JG, Smits LJ, delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;202:355.e15.
Aardenburg R, et al. Vaginal birth after a caesarean section: 120. Craver Pryor E, Mertz HL, Beaver BW, Koontz G, Martinez-
the development of a Western European population- Borges A, Smith JG, et al. Intrapartum predictors of uterine
based prediction model for deliveries at term. BJOG rupture. Am J Perinatol 2007;24:31721.
2014;121:194201. 121. Ofir K, Sheiner E, Levy A, Katz M, Mazor M. Uterine
103. Landon MB, Leindecker S, Spong CY, Hauth JC, Bloom rupture: differences between a scarred and an unscarred
S, Varner MW, et al.; National Institute of Child Health uterus. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:4259.
and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units 122. Holmgren C, Scott JR, Porter TF, Esplin MS, Bardsley
Network. The MFMU Cesarean Registry: factors affecting T. Uterine rupture with attempted vaginal birth after
the success of trial of labor after previous cesarean delivery. cesarean delivery: decision-to-delivery time and neonatal
Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:101623. outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:72531.
104. Stamilio DM, Shanks A. Vaginal birth after cesarean 123. Guiliano M, Closset E, Therby D, LeGoueff F, Deruelle P,
(VBAC) outcomes associated with increasing number of Subtil D. Signs, symptoms and complications of complete
prior VBACs. Womens Health (Lond Engl) 2008;4:2336. and partial uterine ruptures during pregnancy and delivery.
105. Smith GC, Pell JP, Pasupathy D, Dobbie R. Factors Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;179:1304.
predisposing to perinatal death related to uterine rupture 124. Cahill AG, Waterman BM, Stamilio DM, Odibo AO,
during attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section: Allsworth JE, Evanoff B, et al. Higher maximum doses of
retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2004;329:375. oxytocin are associated with an unacceptably high risk for
106. Harper LM, Stamilio DM, Odibo AO, Peipert JF, Macones uterine rupture in patients attempting vaginal birth after
GA. Vaginal birth after cesarean for cephalopelvic cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199:32.e15.
disproportion: effect of birth weight difference on success. 125. Cahill AG, Stamilio DM, Odibo AO, Peipert JF, Stevens EJ,
Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:3438. Macones GA. Does a maximum dose of oxytocin affect risk
107. Costantine MM, Fox K, Byers BD, Mateus J, Ghulmiyyah for uterine rupture in candidates for vaginal birth after
LM, Blackwell S, et al. Validation of the prediction model cesarean delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;197:495.e15.

126. Jozwiak M, van de Lest HA, Burger NB, Dijksterhuis MG, JC, Landon MB, et al.; National Institute of Child Health
De Leeuw JW. Cervical ripening with Foley catheter for and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units
induction of labor after cesarean section: a cohort study. Network. The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Unit cesarean
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2014;93:296301. registry: trial of labor with a twin gestation. Am J Obstet
127. Schmitz T, Pourcelot AG, Moutafoff C, Biran V, Sibony O, Gynecol 2005;193:13540.
Oury JF. Cervical ripening with low-dose prostaglandins 139. Cahill A, Stamilio DM, Par E, Peipert JP, Stevens EJ, Nelson
in planned vaginal birth after cesarean. PLoS One DB, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) attempt
2013;8:e80903. in twin pregnancies: is it safe? Am J Obstet Gynecol
128. Haas J, Barzilay E, Chayen B, Lebovitz O, Yinon Y, Mazaki- 2005;193:10505.
Tovi S, et al. Safety of low-dose prostaglandin E2 induction 140. Ford AA, Bateman BT, Simpson LL. Vaginal birth
in grandmultiparous women with previous cesarean after cesarean delivery in twin gestations: a large,
delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2014;27:4458. nationwide sample of deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol
129. Jozwiak M, Dodd JM. Methods of term labour induction 2006;195:113842.
for women with a previous caesarean section. Cochrane 141. Aaronson D, Harlev A, Sheiner E, Levy A. Trial of labor
Database Syst Rev 2013;(3):CD009792. after cesarean section in twin pregnancies: maternal
130. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. and neonatal safety. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
Antenatal Corticosteroids to Reduce Neonatal Morbidity 2010;23:5504.
and Mortality. Green-top Guideline No. 7. London: RCOG; 142. Elkousy MA, Sammel M, Stevens E, Peipert JF, Macones
2010. G. The effect of birth weight on vaginal birth after
131. Seckl JR, Holmes MC. Mechanisms of disease: cesarean delivery success rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol
glucocorticoids, their placental metabolism and fetal 2003;188:82430.
programming of adult pathophysiology. Nat Clin Pract 143. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Late
Endocrinol Metab 2007;3:47988. Intrauterine Fetal Death and Stillbirth. Green-top
132. Stutchfield PR, Whitaker R, Gliddon AE, Hobson L, Kotecha Guideline No. 55. London: RCOG; 2010.
S, Doull IJ. Behavioural, educational and respiratory 144. Ramirez MM, Gilbert S, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, Spong
outcomes of antenatal betamethasone for term caesarean CY, Varner MW, et al. Mode of delivery in women with
section (ASTECS trial). Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed antepartum fetal death and prior cesarean delivery. Am J
2013;98:F195200. Perinatol 2010;27:82530.
133. Kenyon SL, Taylor DJ, Tarnow-Mordi W; ORACLE 145. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.
Collaborative Group. Broad-spectrum antibiotics for Induction of Labour at Term in Older Mothers. Scientific
preterm, prelabour rupture of fetal membranes: the Impact Paper No. 34. London: RCOG; 2013.
ORACLE I randomised trial. Lancet 2001;357:97988. 146. Srinivas SK, Stamilio DM, Stevens EJ, Odibo AO, Peipert JF,
134. Kenyon SL, Taylor DJ, Tarnow-Mordi W; ORACLE Macones GA. Predicting failure of a vaginal birth attempt
Collaborative Group. Broad-spectrum antibiotics for after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:8005.
spontaneous preterm labour: the ORACLE II randomised 147. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ,
trial. Lancet 2001;357:98994. Rouse DJ, et al.; National Institute of Child Health and
135. National Collaborating Centre for Womens and Childrens Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine
Health. Caesarean section. NICE Clinical Guideline. Units Network (MFMU). Development of a nomogram for
London: RCOG; 2011 [http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet
cg132/evidence/cg132-caesarean-section-full-guideline-3]. Gynecol 2007;109:80612.
Accessed 2015 Mar 18. 148. Durnwald CP, Rouse DJ, Leveno KJ, Spong CY, MacPherson
136. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. C, Varner MW, et al.; National Institute of Child Health
Reducing the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism during and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units
Pregnancy and the Puerperium. Green-top Guideline No. Network. The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Cesarean
37a. London: RCOG; 2015. Registry: safety and efficacy of a trial of labor in preterm
137. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. pregnancy after a prior cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet
Induction of labour. NICE clinical guideline 70. Gynecol 2006;195:111926.
Manchester: NICE; 2008.
138. Varner MW, Leindecker S, Spong CY, Moawad AH, Hauth

Appendix I: Definitions of terms
Planned VBAC Planned VBAC (vaginal birth after previous caesarean delivery) refers to the
intended mode of delivery of any woman who has experienced a prior caesarean
birth who plans to deliver vaginally rather than by elective repeat caesarean
section (ERCS).
Successful and unsuccessful A vaginal delivery (spontaneous or assisted) in a woman undergoing planned
planned VBAC VBAC indicates a successful VBAC. Delivery by emergency caesarean during
the labour indicates an unsuccessful VBAC.
Uterine rupture Disruption of the uterine muscle extending to and involving the uterine serosa or
disruption of the uterine muscle with extension to the bladder or broad ligament.
Uterine dehiscence Disruption of the uterine muscle with intact uterine serosa.
Perinatal mortality Combined number of stillbirths (antepartum and intrapartum) and neonatal
deaths between 20 weeks of gestation and 28 days of life per 10000 live
births and stillbirths. Perinatal mortality rate will exclude deaths due to fetal
malformation unless otherwise stated.
Term delivery-related perinatal Term delivery-related perinatal death is defined as the combined number of
death intrapartum stillbirths and neonatal deaths per 10000 live births and stillbirths
at or beyond 37+0 weeks of gestation. Birth-related perinatal mortality rates
exclude antepartum stillbirths and deaths due to fetal malformation unless
otherwise stated.
Neonatal respiratory morbidity Combined rate of transient tachypnoea of the newborn and respiratory distress
syndrome.

Appendix II: Example of a schedule of antenatal care
12+0 weeks Provision of written patient information on delivery options (VBAC and ERCS).
1821+0 weeks Ultrasonographer to perform midtrimester scan for fetal anomaly and placental localisation.
Reschedule ultrasound at 3234 weeks for women identified to have a low-lying placenta with a
history of previous caesarean delivery.
2128 weeks Antenatal counselling appointment for women with uncomplicated singleton pregnancies and
single previous lower segment caesarean delivery. Documented counselling of risks and benefits
of VBAC versus ERCS (facilitated by use of decision aid, pro forma or checklist). A review of the
previous caesarean delivery, with access to the womans previous obstetric medical record, should
take place. Counselling should be undertaken by member(s) of the maternity team.
Midwifery review for all pregnant women. Undertake routine reviews and completion of 28-week
screening tests (e.g. full blood count, ABO rhesus D group status, administration of anti-D if
appropriate).
3234 weeks Obstetrician-led assessment of women with previous caesarean delivery who are identified to have
a low-lying placenta at 3234-week obstetric ultrasound. The aim is to provide adequate time for
investigation and management of possible placenta accreta.
Midwifery review for women with normally sited placenta. Establish womans preference for
planned VBAC or ERCS and ensure suitability for planned VBAC (i.e. cephalic presentation, no other
obstetric complications).
By 36 weeks Obstetrician-led assessment to determine mode of delivery for women who opted for ERCS, are
undecided on mode of delivery or have complicating obstetric and medical disorders (e.g. multiple
pregnancy, delivery of a macrosomic infant [birthweight of 4 kg or more], small for gestational age
and/or fetal growth restriction, pre-eclampsia).
Midwifery review to confirm suitability and maternal preference for planned VBAC (i.e. woman
understands all risks/benefits, has normally grown fetus with cephalic presentation, no other
obstetric complications).
After 39 weeks Performing ERCS

If ERCS is required prior to 39 +0 weeks for obstetric or medical indications then prophylactic
antenatal corticosteroids may be considered to reduce the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity
(transient tachypnoea of the newborn, respiratory distress syndrome). However, concerns
regarding the long-term safety should be discussed with the mother.
41+0 weeks Senior obstetrician-led assessment for women who had opted for planned VBAC but have not gone
into spontaneous labour. Risks and benefits of various options are discussed and documented.
Options include membrane sweep, prostaglandin, amniotomy or Foley catheter induction of labour,
ERCS or expectant management.

Appendix III: Clinical management of pregnant women who have had one or more caesarean birth(s)
Management of pregnant women who have one or more caesarean birth(s)

Any contraindications to VBAC
l Placental localisation exclude praevia accreta.
l Review previous record and operative notes.
l Medical or obstetric conditions that preclude VBAC.
Antenatal counselling and shared decision-making process
l E xplain risks and benefits of planned VBAC versus ERCS, including the individualised likelihood of VBAC success.
m For example, women with previous vaginal births should be informed that previous vaginal delivery, particularly
previous VBAC, is the single best predictor of successful VBAC and is associated with planned VBAC success rates of
8590%.
m Greater maternal height, maternal age less than 40 years, BMI less than 30, gestation of less than 40 weeks and
infant birthweight less than 4 kg (or similar/lower birthweight to/than index caesarean delivery) are associated with
an increased likelihood of successful VBAC.
m In addition, spontaneous onset of labour, vertex presentation, fetal head engagement or a lower station, and higher
admission Bishop score also increase the likelihood of successful VBAC.
m Successful VBAC is more likely among women with prior caesarean for fetal malpresentation (84%).
l Elicit maternal choice for mode of delivery and how it fits with future reproductive preferences.
Intrapartum care for VBAC
l Delivery setting, monitoring, analgesia.
l Recognising failure to progress and/or uterine rupture.
l Caution if induction and/or augmentation is/are considered necessary.
Intrapartum care for ERCS
l Preferred gestational timing to conduct caesarean (from 39 +0 weeks).
l Perioperative management.
Management of women in special circumstances
l VBAC in the presence of high-risk obstetric factors.

Appendix IV: Birth choices after caesarean delivery pathway
Likelihood of Overall Tick when

discussed
Successful VBAC (one previous caesarean delivery, no previous vaginal birth) 3 out of 4 or 7275%
Successful VBAC (one previous caesarean delivery, at least one previous Almost 9 out of 10 or
vaginal birth) up to 8590%
Unsuccessful VBAC more likely in:

Induced labour, no previous vaginal delivery, body mass index (BMI) greater than 30 and previous
caesarean for labour dystocia. If all of these factors are present, successful VBAC is achieved in 40%
of cases.
Likelihood of VBAC ERCS
Maternal
Uterine rupture 5 per 1000/0.5% < 2 per 10000/< 0.02%
Blood transfusion 2 per 100/2% 1 per 100/1%
Endometritis No significant difference in risk
Serious complications Not applicable if successful Increased likelihood of placenta praevia/

in future pregnancies VBAC morbidly adherent placenta
Maternal mortality 4 per 100000/0.004% 13 per 100000/0.013%
Fetal/newborn
Transient respiratory 23 per 100/23% 46 per 100/46% (risk reduced with

morbidity corticosteroids, but there are concerns
about potential long-term adverse effects)
Antepartum stillbirth 10 per 10000/0.1% Not applicable

beyond 39 +0 weeks
while awaiting
spontaneous labour
Hypoxic ischaemic 8 per 10000/0.08% < 1 per 10000/< 0.01%

encephalopathy (HIE)
Information leaflet(s) provided: VBAC ERCS Other
Discussed:
Continuous electronic fetal monitoring at the onset of regular uterine contractions

Birth on the labour suite
Need for intravenous (IV) access in labour
Comments:

Management plan in the event of:
Preterm labour (< 37+0 weeks) VBAC Emergency caesarean delivery
Spontaneous labour before VBAC Caesarean delivery D

epends on stage of
ERCS date labour details below
No spontaneous labour after Sweep I nduction of labour (give details of agreed plan below) ERCS
41 weeks discussed with
senior obstetrician
Use of oxytocin in labour

discussed with senior
obstetrician
Details of induction of labour:
ERCS booking details:
Additional comments:

Appendix V: VBAC success and uterine rupture risks of planned VBAC labours
Spontaneous Induced Augmented
AHRQ meta-analysis9 VBAC success *74% (95% CI 63% (95% CI 68% (95% CI
7275%) 5967%) 6472%)
Uterine rupture *0.47% (95% CI 1.2% (95% CI 1.1% (95% CI
0.280.68%) 0.71.9%) 0.91.5%)
NICHD study18,103 VBAC success 80.6% 67.4% 73.9%

(n = 17898 VBACs)
Uterine rupture 0.36% 1.02% 0.87%
Australian population study22 VBAC success 52.6% 51.4% 61.6%

(n = 10958 VBACs)
Uterine rupture 0.15% 0.68% 1.91%
UK Obstetric Surveillance System Uterine rupture 0.13% 0.36% 0.28%

casecontrol study20
*refers to overall rates when spontaneous, induced and augmented labours are combined, although the large majority of data
are derived from spontaneous labour.

Appendix VI: Explanation of guidelines and evidence levels
Clinical guidelines are: systematically developed statements which assist clinicians and patients in
making decisions about appropriate treatment for specific conditions. Each guideline is systematically
developed using a standardised methodology. Exact details of this process can be found in Clinical
Governance Advice No.1 Development of RCOG Green-top Guidelines (available on the RCOG website
at http://www.rcog.org.uk/green-top-development). These recommendations are not intended to dictate
an exclusive course of management or treatment. They must be evaluated with reference to individual
patient needs, resources and limitations unique to the institution and variations in local populations.
It is hoped that this process of local ownership will help to incorporate these guidelines into routine
practice. Attention is drawn to areas of clinical uncertainty where further research may be indicated.
The evidence used in this guideline was graded using the scheme below and the recommendations
formulated in a similar fashion with a standardised grading scheme.
Classification of evidence levels Grades of recommendations

1++ High-quality meta-analyses, systematic At least one meta-analysis, systematic review or
reviews of randomised controlled trials or A randomised controlled trial rated as 1++, and
randomised controlled trials with a very directly applicable to the target population; or
low risk of bias A systematic review of randomised controlled
1+ Well-conducted meta-analyses, systematic trials or a body of evidence consisting
reviews of randomised controlled trials principally of studies rated as 1+, directly
or randomised controlled trials with a applicable to the target population and
low risk of bias demonstrating overall consistency of results
1 Meta-analyses, systematic reviews of A body of evidence including studies rated
randomised controlled trials or
B as 2++ directly applicable to the target
randomised controlled trials with a high population, and demonstrating overall
risk of bias consistency of results; or
2++ High-quality systematic reviews of Extrapolated evidence from studies rated as
casecontrol or cohort studies or high- 1++ or 1+
quality casecontrol or cohort studies
A body of evidence including studies rated as
with a very low risk of confounding, bias C 2+ directly applicable to the target population,
or chance and a high probability that the
and demonstrating overall consistency of
relationship is causal
results; or
2+ Well-conducted casecontrol or cohort Extrapolated evidence from studies rated as
studies with a low risk of confounding, 2++
bias or chance and a moderate
Evidence level 3 or 4; or
probability that the relationship is causal D Extrapolated evidence from studies rated as 2+
2 Casecontrol or cohort studies with a
high risk of confounding, bias or chance
and a significant risk that the
relationship is not causal Good practice point
3 Non-analytical studies, e.g. case reports, Recommended best practice based on the
case series P clinical experience of the guideline
4 Expert opinion development group

This guideline was produced on behalf of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists by:
Professor JK Gupta FRCOG, Birmingham; Professor GCS Smith FRCOG, Cambridge; and Mr RR Chodankar MRCOG,
Camberley
and peer reviewed by:
Professor Z Alfirevic FRCOG, Liverpool; Ms SM Baines, midwifery lecturer and supervisor of midwives,
Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust; Dr S Bewley FRCOG, London; British Maternal and Fetal
Medicine Society; Mrs A Diyaf MRCOG, Barnstaple; Dr AA Elkady FRCOG, Greater Cairo, Egypt; Mr UI Esen FRCOG,
South Shields; Dr M Formosa FRCOG, Msida, Malta; Mr DI Fraser FRCOG, Norwich; Mr M Griffiths FRCOG, Luton;
Dr S Hamilton FRCOG, Huntingdon; Dr KR Harding FRCOG, London; Mr DW Irons FRCOG, Durham; Dr SI Kayani
FRCOG, Sabah Al-Salem, Kuwait; Dr R Malhas MRCOG, Walsall; Mr CN Nzewi MRCOG, Guernsey; Mr SOU Orife FRCOG,
South Shields; Dr MAK Perera, Avissawella, Sri Lanka; RCOG Ethics Committee; RCOG Womens Network; Royal College
of Midwives; Dr S Rutter MRCOG, Rotherham; Dr P Sarkar FRCOG, Slough; Dr JR Scott FRCOG, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA;
Dr M Sinha MRCOG, Chichester; Mrs P Sinha FRCOG, St Leonards-on-Sea; Dr CY Spong, Eunice Kennedy Shriver
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA;
The Royal College of Radiologists; Dr CL Tower MRCOG, Manchester; Dr AU Ukpong, Port Harcourt, Nigeria;
Mr DP Webster MRCOG, Poole; and Dr SNE Webster MRCOG, Newcastle upon Tyne.
Committee lead reviewers were: Mrs G Kumar FRCOG, Wrexham; Dr P Owen FRCOG, Glasgow; and Dr AJ Thomson
MRCOG, Paisley.
The chairs of the RCOG Guidelines Committee were: Dr M Gupta1 MRCOG, London; Dr P Owen2 FRCOG, Glasgow;
and Dr AJ Thomson1 MRCOG, Paisley.
1
co-chairs from June 2014 2until May 2014.
All RCOG guidance developers are asked to declare any conflicts of interest. A statement summarising any
conflicts of interest for this guideline is available from: https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/guidelines-research-services/
guidelines/gtg45/.
The final version is the responsibility of the Guidelines Committee of the RCOG.
The review process will commence in 2018, unless otherwise indicated.
DISCLAIMER
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists produces guidelines as an educational aid to good clinical
practice.They present recognised methods and techniques of clinical practice, based on published evidence, for
consideration by obstetricians and gynaecologists and other relevant health professionals.The ultimate judgement
regarding a particular clinical procedure or treatment plan must be made by the doctor or other attendant in the light
of clinical data presented by the patient and the diagnostic and treatment options available.
This means that RCOG Guidelines are unlike protocols or guidelines issued by employers, as they are not intended to
be prescriptive directions defining a single course of management. Departure from the local prescriptive protocols or
guidelines should be fully documented in the patients case notes at the time the relevant decision is taken.

Vbac Royal Colleg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vbac Royal Colleg

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Vbac Royal Colleg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Birth After Previous

Green-top Guideline No. 45

Executive summary of recommendations

Suitability for planned VBAC

What are the contraindications to VBAC?

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 2 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

A patient information leaflet should be provided with the consultation.

What is the likelihood of VBAC success?

Intrapartum management of planned VBAC

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 3 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

Planning and conducting ERCS

ERCS delivery should be conducted after 39+0 weeks of gestation.

How should women in special circumstances be cared for?

1. Purpose and scope

2. Introduction and background epidemiology

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 4 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

3. Identification and assessment of evidence

4. Identified studies and limitations of data

5. Antenatal care schedule

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 5 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

6. Suitability for planned VBAC

There is a consensus, endorsed by evidence-based systematic reviews9,16,17 and clinical

6.2 What are the contraindications to VBAC?

Previous uterine rupture

Type of previous uterine incision

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 6 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 7 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

There is uncertainty in how to incorporate this knowledge in antenatal counselling and

A patient information leaflet should be provided with the consultation.

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 8 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

Planned VBAC adverse maternal outcomes

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 9 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

Planned VBAC ERCS from 39+0 weeks

Infant outcomes Risk of transient respiratory morbidity of 23%. R

Hysterectomy and other morbidities

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 10 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

A review of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network publications75 suggests that, at term,

Planned VBAC adverse perinatal outcomes

Delivery-related perinatal death

Neonatal hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE)

ERCS and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes

Neonatal respiratory morbidity

Long-term outcomes of planned VBAC versus ERCS

Perinatal outcomes of planned VBAC versus ERCS

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 11 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

A review of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network publications75 suggests that, at term,

Summary of outcomes of planned VBAC versus ERCS

7.3 What is the likelihood of VBAC success?

7.4 What factors determine the individualised likelihood of VBAC success?

Several pre-admission- and admission-based multivariate models have been published to

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 12 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

8. Intrapartum management of planned VBAC

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 13 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

The clinical features associated with uterine scar rupture include:

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 14 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 15 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

9. Planning and conducting ERCS

However, the current RCOG Green-top Guideline on antenatal corticosteroids130 raises a

RCOG Green-top Guideline No. 45 16 of 31 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists