MARATTO

article · World Journal of Advanced Pharmaceutical and Medical Research

Spontaneous vaginal birth after multiple previous caesarean sections: A case report and literature review

Abstract

Background: Vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC) is increasingly recognized as a safe and effective option for women with a history of Caesarean deliveries. However, limited attention has been given to feasibility and safety of VBAC after multiple caesarean sections. Case presentation: A 36-year-old woman with a history of four previous Caesarean sections presented in our centre in third stage of labour. Despite counseling for elective Caesarean section, she had a spontaneous vaginal delivery of a live 2.6 kg female neonate in a vehicle en route to the hospital. On arrival, she was stable but had lost about 500ml of blood. Immediate interventions included active management of third stage of labour and assessment for perineal injuries, with subsequent monitoring and blood transfusion. She had a normal postpartum recovery, was discharged after four days, and had a reassuring 6-week post-natal visit, with a referral to family planning. Conclusion: This case underscores the potential success and safety of vaginal birth after multiple (three or more) Caesarean sections, challenging the notion that a history of repeated C-sections precludes this option. Vaginal birth after CS (VBAC), initially restricted to one previous CS, is now considered in selected cases with two prior abdominal deliveries. However, the acceptance of VBAC after three or more CS remains limited despite available evidences indicating comparable success rates and maternal risks for VBAC after multiple CS when compared to VBAC after one prior CS or elective repeat CS.

Research topics

  • Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Gynecological conditions and treatments
  • Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.53346/wjapmr.2024.7.1.0039

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.