{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,20]],"date-time":"2026-08-20T15:27:10Z","timestamp":1787239630538,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":14,"publisher":"Georg Thieme Verlag KG","issue":"15","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Am J Perinatol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Objective\u2003Following the release of A Randomized Trial of Induction versus Expectant Management (ARRIVE) trial, the induction of labor at 39 weeks has increased in the United States. The risk of uterine rupture and optimal timing of elective induction in those patients with a prior cesarean delivery is not well-described, and they were not included in the original trial. We aimed to determine the risk of uterine rupture in those patients undergoing elective induction of labor with prior cesarean delivery.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Study Design\u2003This was a retrospective cohort of participants with prior cesarean delivery from 1996 to 2000. Participants were included if they had two or more prior cesareans. Participants were excluded if they had a history of an unknown prior incision, a classical incision, gestational age &lt;39 weeks, any diabetes, chronic hypertension, twin gestation, collagen or vascular disease, or HIV. Those undergoing expectant management were compared with those undergoing elective induction with no medical or obstetrical indications for delivery. Analysis was performed at three gestational age groups: 39 weeks, 40 weeks, and 41 weeks. The primary outcomes were uterine rupture, rates of successful vaginal delivery, and a composite major morbidity risk. Multivariable logistic regression was performed.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Results\u2003At 39 weeks, 618 (10.3%) elective inductions were compared with 5,365 (89.7%) undergoing expectant management; uterine rupture occurred more frequently (13 patients [2.1%] vs. 49 patients [0.9%]; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.3\u20134.6) with fewer successful vaginal birth after cesarean [VBAC; 66.8 vs. 75%; aOR, 0.6; 95% confidence interval, 0.5\u20130.7]. The risk of uterine rupture was similar between groups at 40 weeks (5 patients [0.8%] vs. 21 patients [1.2%]; p\u2009=\u20090.387) and 41 weeks (7 patients [1.4%] vs. 2 patients (0.8%); p\u2009=\u20090.448).<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Conclusion\u2003Patients undergoing elective induction of labor with a prior cesarean scar had an increased risk of uterine rupture when compared with expectant management at 39 weeks, with fewer successful VBAC.<\/jats:p>\n                  <jats:p>Key Points<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1055\/a-2310-9817","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,22]],"date-time":"2024-04-22T18:55:30Z","timestamp":1713812130000},"page":"2033-2039","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["Elective Induction of Labor following Prior Cesarean Delivery"],"prefix":"10.1055","volume":"41","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-1907-2413","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Alexander M.","family":"Saucedo","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Women's Health, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"George A.","family":"Macones","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Women's Health, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Alison G.","family":"Cahill","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Women's Health, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-0132-2194","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Lorie M.","family":"Harper","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Women's Health, Dell Medical School, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"194","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,10]]},"reference":[{"issue":"17","key":"ref1","first-page":"1","article-title":"Births: Final data for 2020","volume":"70","author":"M Osterman","year":"2021","journal-title":"Natl Vital Stat Rep"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"513","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1800566","article-title":"Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women","volume":"379","author":"W A Grobman","year":"2018","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e110","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000003078","article-title":"ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205: Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery","volume":"133","author":"The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists","year":"2019","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"12","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000224694.32531.f3","article-title":"Risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor in women with multiple and single prior cesarean delivery","volume":"108","author":"M B Landon","year":"2006","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"05","key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1656","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2005.04.002","article-title":"Maternal complications with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a multicenter study","volume":"193","author":"G A Macones","year":"2005","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"358.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2015.01.026","article-title":"Induction of labor versus expectant management for women with a prior cesarean delivery","volume":"212","author":"A Palatnik","year":"2015","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref7","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"115","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000000922","article-title":"Outcomes of term induction in trial of labor after cesarean delivery: analysis of a modern obstetric cohort","volume":"126","author":"J R Lappen","year":"2015","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S768","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2021.11.1260","article-title":"Risk of labor induction or augmentation on uterine rupture during trial of labor after cesarean","volume":"226","author":"B M Muller","year":"2022","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"882","DOI":"10.1016\/S0002-9378(99)70319-4","article-title":"Uterine rupture during induced or augmented labor in gravid women with one prior cesarean delivery","volume":"181","author":"C M Zelop","year":"1999","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"07","key":"ref10","first-page":"CD004906","article-title":"Elective repeat caesarean section versus induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth","volume":"7","author":"J M Dodd","year":"2017","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"key":"ref11","volume-title":"Prior cesarean delivery","author":"F Cunningham","year":"2022"},{"issue":"15","key":"ref12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2853","DOI":"10.1080\/14767058.2020.1807505","article-title":"Outcomes of labor induction at 39 weeks in pregnancies with a prior cesarean delivery","volume":"35","author":"B Y Park","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med"},{"key":"ref13","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"390","DOI":"10.1097\/01.AOG.0000452744.06088.48","article-title":"Practice bulletin no. 146: Management of late-term and postterm pregnancies","volume":"124","author":"The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists","year":"2014","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"05","key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1181","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3182704880","article-title":"Preventing the first cesarean delivery: summary of a joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Workshop","volume":"120","author":"C Y Spong","year":"2012","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"}],"container-title":["American Journal of Perinatology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/products\/ejournals\/pdf\/10.1055\/a-2310-9817.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,11,5]],"date-time":"2024-11-05T08:33:40Z","timestamp":1730795620000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/DOI\/DOI?10.1055\/a-2310-9817"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,22]]},"references-count":14,"journal-issue":{"issue":"15","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,10,22]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2024,11]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/a-2310-9817","archive":["Portico","CLOCKSS"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0735-1631","1098-8785"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0735-1631","type":"print"},{"value":"1098-8785","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,22]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,22]]}}}