ABSTRACT
A retrospective study of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) was conducted over 24
months. Of 152 women who had a previous cesarean, 141 were offered VBAC. Sixty-eight
had an elective repeat cesarean, and 73 agreed to VBAC. These groups were similar
with respect to age, race, parity, and weight. Fifty-nine of the VBAC patients delivered
vaginally (80.8%). The two groups were compared for the incidence of febrile morbidity,
endomyometritis, uterine dehiscence and estimated blood loss at delivery. There were
no significant differences between the two groups or when each was compared with a
control group of 69 routine vaginal deliveries except for the estimated blood loss
and the number of days hospitalized (p < 0.05). Neonatal morbidity was examined between
the two groups by comparing the incidence of transient tachypnea and the number of
newborns with suspected sepsis, as well as those requiring antibiotics or admission
to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. The repeat cesarean group had a higher overall
incidence of neonatal morbidity than the VBAC group, but this was not statistically
significant. However, there was statistical significance (p < 0.05) when comparing
the number of days hospitalized between the infants in the VBAC group versus the repeat
cesarean group. This study supports VBAC as a safe alternative to elective repeat
cesarean for the patient and neonate. Data analysis was performed using Student's
t test or chi-square analysis with a p < 0.05 regarded as being statistically significant.