Papers

Long term outcome by method of delivery of fetuses in breech presentation at term: population based follow up

^a Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen AB9 2ZA, ^b Aberdeen University Medical School, Foresterhill, Aberdeen AB9 1FX

Correspondence to: Dr Danielian.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the long term outcome of infants delivered in breech presentation at term by intended mode of delivery.
Design: A population based comparison of outcomes up to school age. Data obtained from maternity, health visitor, and school medical records and handicap register.
Setting: Grampian region 1981-90.
Subjects: 1645 infants delivered alive at term after breech presentation.
Main outcome measures: Handicap, developmental delay, neurological deficit, psychiatric referral.
Results: Elective caesarean section was performed in 590 (35.9%) cases. The remainder (1055; 64.1%) were intended vaginal deliveries. Handicap or other health problem was recorded in 269 (19.4%) of 1387 infants for whom records were available. Proportions of elective caesarean sections and intended vaginal deliveries in this group were 37.2% (100 cases) and 62.8% (169) respectively, almost the same as in the total cohort. There were no significant differences between elective caesarean section and planned vaginal delivery in terms of severe handicap or any other outcome measure. Case records were obtained for 23 of 27 infants with severe handicap. 11 (47.8%) were delivered by elective caesarean section. Of these, three had undiagnosed congenital abnormalities and seven were unexplained. Of the 12 (52.2%) planned vaginal deliveries, in only one was handicap possibly attributable to delivery and four cases were unavoidable even if elective caesarean section had been planned.
Conclusion: In selected cases of breech presentation at term planned vaginal delivery with caesarean section if necessary remains as safe as elective caesarean section in terms of long term handicap. It was not possible to determine whether particular babies would have fared better had they been delivered by elective caesarean section.

Introduction

The optimal method of delivery for breech presentation at term remains uncertain. Many workers claim that elective caesarean section improves immediate neonatal outcome^{1 2 3} whereas others maintain that for appropriately selected cases there is no difference in perinatal outcome whatever the intended method of delivery.^{4 5 6} The methodological quality of most of these studies is questionable; often all caesarean sections (elective and emergency) are compared with vaginal delivery or preterm cases are included. No prospective randomised controlled trial of sufficient size has examined the issue. A recent critical review concluded that, though planned vaginal delivery might cause higher perinatal mortality and morbidity than elective caesarean section (typical odds ratio 3.96; 95% confidence interval 2.76 to 5.67), most studies contained selection bias.⁷

The long term outcome of infants delivered in breech presentation at term has not been extensively studied. Of the three reported studies, two followed up only complicated cases for one to six years^{8 9} and the third compared two different methods of selection for vaginal delivery in two consecutive four year periods.¹⁰ None was prospective or randomised. Despite the paucity and diversity of these data meta-analysis of the three studies suggested that planned vaginal delivery was associated with long term morbidity (typical odds ratio 2.88; 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 7.97).⁷ This was not a robust conclusion because it is inadequate to follow up only selected cases.

We examined the long term morbidity (up to 4-5 years of age) of a large cohort of infants delivered in breech presentation at term by the planned method of delivery.

Patients and methods

Aberdeen Maternity Hospital is the only specialist hospital for a population of 500 000. The Aberdeen Maternity and Neonatal Databank is a computerised database of obstetric and neonatal data for the total population. All breech deliveries at term (greater than 37 completed weeks of pregnancy) in Grampian from 1981 to 1990 were identified. Stillbirths and neonatal deaths were excluded (perinatal mortality was as reported¹¹) and the remaining cohort analysed. Infants with morbidity or handicap were identified from health visitor records and the computerised database of the Raeden Centre (the regional unit for severely handicapped children; all infants identified from this source were defined as "severely handicapped"). Psychiatric handicap included behavioural disturbances such as encopresis and severe tantrums. All identified cases of handicap were severe enough to necessitate referral to professionals.

The proportions of planned vaginal and elective caesarean deliveries in the group of handicapped infants were compared with the proportions in the whole cohort. The same analysis was performed for different classes of handicap and for primiparous mothers. Mean birth weight, mean maternal height, and median parity in the planned vaginal delivery and elective caesarean section groups were compared. The same characteristics and the sex ratio of infants with and without handicap in the successful vaginal delivery group were also compared. Obstetric case notes of the severely handicapped infants were examined.

Statistical analysis was by Fisher's exact test, Student's t test, or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate with commercial statistical software (SPSS for Windows, SPSS Inc, Chicago).

Results

Between 1981 and 1990 in Aberdeen Maternity Hospital there were 1645 breech deliveries of liveborn infants at term who survived the first week of life. Of these, 590 (35.9%) were elective caesarean sections and 1055 (64.1%) planned vaginal deliveries; 610 (37.1%) were successful vaginal deliveries. The proportions of each intended mode of delivery were similar in primiparous and multiparous women (table 1), though the proportion of successful vaginal deliveries was significantly lower in primiparous women (29.5% v 45.2% (P<0.0001); odds ratio 0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.62)) (table 2).

Table 1--Intended mode of delivery of fetuses in breech presentation at term by parity
of mothers 1981-90, Grampian region. Figures in parentheses are percentages
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Planned
                No     Elective caesarean section                  vaginal delivery
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primipara       850             313 (36.8)                             537 (63.2)
Multipara       795             277 (34.8)                             518 (65.2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total          1645             590 (35.9)                            1055 (64.1)

Table 2--Actual mode of delivery of fetuses in breech
presentation at term by parity of mothers 1981-90, Gram-
pian region. Figures in parentheses are percentages
------------------------------------------------------------------
                      All caesarean              Successful
             No           section              vaginal delivery
------------------------------------------------------------------
Primipara    850          599 (70.5)             251 (29.5)
Multipara    795          436 (54.8)             359 (45.2)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Total       1645         1035 (62.9)             610 (37.1)
------------------------------------------------------------------
P<0.0001, odds ratio 0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.62).

For 258 (15.7%) of the 1645 cases health visitor records were not identified (108 in the planned caesarean section group, 150 in the planned vaginal delivery group). The remaining 1387 cases were available for analysis.

There were 269 infants (19.4%) with identified handicap. Of these, the intended mode of delivery was elective caesarean section in 100 (37.2%) and planned vaginal delivery in 169 (62.8%). These proportions were not significantly different from those in the whole cohort. There were no significant differences in the frequency of any class of handicap. Twenty seven infants had severe handicap, of whom 14 (51.9%) were delivered by elective caesarean section. There were no significant differences in the frequency of handicap by intended mode of delivery (table 3).

Table 3--Types of handicap among infants for whom health visitor records were available by intended mode of delivery. Figures in parentheses are
percentages
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Severe       Speech     Growth     General    Gross                                                         Total infants with
                     No  handicap       delay      delay      delay     motor     Convulsions   Visual     Auditory   Psychiatric   any handicap+
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Elective caesarean
  section            482  14 (2.9)     28 (5.8)   4 (0.8)    13 (2.7)   3 (0.6)     15 (3.1)    18 (3.7)   18 (3.7)    13 (2.7)       100 (20.7)
Planned vaginal
  delivery           905  13 (1.4)     44 (4.9)   8 (0.9)    13 (1.4)   1 (0.1)     13 (1.4)    25 (2.8)   42 (4.6)    17 (1.9)       169 (18.7)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total               1387  27 (1.9)     72 (5.2)   12 (0.9)   26 (1.9)   4 (0.3)     28 (2.0)    43 (3.1)   60 (4.3)    30 (2.2)       269 (19.4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Some infants had more than one handicap.

Similar results were obtained with primigravid mothers, though there were significantly more severely handicapped infants in the elective caesarean section group than in the planned vaginal delivery group (2.6% v 0.6% (P=0.02); odds ratio 4.67 (1.23 to 17.74)). There were no other significant differences between the groups.

There were more girl infants in all groups. This has been reported before.¹² Mean maternal height in the elective caesarean section group was less than in the planned vaginal delivery group (160 cm v 162 cm; t=6.21, P<0.0001) but there were no differences in mean birth weight or median parity (table 4). In those cases in which vaginal delivery was successful there were no significant differences in mean birth weight, mean maternal height, or birth sex ratio between handicapped and non-handicapped infants. However, parity was significantly greater in the non-handicapped group (1.0 v 0.7; U=22811, P=0.008) (table 5).

Table 4--Maternal characteristics by intended mode of delivery (whole cohort)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Elective caesarean section    Planned vaginal delivery
                                       (n=590)                    (n=1055)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mean birth weight (g)
 (SD) [range]                  3263 (492) [1540-4740]       3261 (488) [1240-5020]    NS
Mean maternal height (cm)
(SD) [range]                    160 (7) [134-183]             162 (6) [144-185]     P<0.0001
Median parity [range]                0 [0-8]                       0 [0-7]            NS

Table 5--Characteristics of groups with and without handicap delivered vaginally
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               With handicap
                                  (n=107)            No handicap (n=503)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mean birth weight (g)
 (SD) [range]               3162 (473) [1390-4740]   3207 (457) [1240-4580]          NS
Mean maternal height (cm)
 (SD) [range]                  162 (5) [152-177]       163 (6) [147-185]             NS
Median parity [range]              0.7 [0-4]               1.0 [0-6]          P=0.008; U=22811
Birth sex ratio (M:F)                49:51                   43:57                   NS

The obstetric case notes of 23 of the 27 severely handicapped infants were examined. Of the 11 (47.8%) who had been delivered by elective caesarean section, three had undiagnosed congenital handicap (one Down's syndrome, one fetal alcohol syndrome, and one multiple congenital abnormalities). In one case the mother did not attend for antenatal care and was not delivered until 44 weeks' gestation. The remaining infants delivered by elective caesarean section had no identifiable antenatal or perinatal cause for their subsequent neurological handicap. Of the 12 (52.2%) severely handicapped infants for whom vaginal delivery was planned, four cases were unavoidable (one severe abruption before admission, one cord prolapse before admission, two advanced labour on admission). In one case antenatal care was inadequate but the cause of handicap could not be ascertained, and one infant sustained severe trauma during difficult delivery of the aftercoming head with forceps. In two cases fetal heart rate abnormalities in labour were not acted on appropriately. In the remaining cases the subsequent handicap could not be explained by any obvious obstetric or perinatal factor.

There were five cases of the sudden infant death syndrome, two in the elective caesarean section group and three in the planned vaginal delivery group (one infant in this group was delivered by emergency caesarean section).

Discussion

Data are not available on how the handicap rate for breech delivery compares with that for cephalic delivery in our population, but other studies have found no significant differences at 2 to 10 years of age.^{10 13}

The proportions of infants with handicap were almost identical in women having planned vaginal delivery and those having elective caesarean section. This suggests that given current standards of obstetric and neonatal care the planned mode of delivery has little effect on long term outcome up to school age. Significantly more severely handicapped infants of primigravid women were delivered by elective caesarean section, though it is not plausible that caesarean section could have caused such handicap.

Possibly the case selection for planned vaginal delivery was so good that obstetric accident likely to cause handicap was avoided. This is impossible to assess retrospectively. Some degree of selection was probably employed because of the significant difference in mean maternal height between the planned vaginal delivery and planned caesarean section groups. This difference was small (2 cm) and the range similar. The clinical relevance of the difference is uncertain. There was no consistent method of selection for planned vaginal delivery over the 10 years. Some clinicians used x ray pelvimetry or fetal weight estimated by ultrasonography, or both, but others did not. It seems unlikely that ideal selection of cases was responsible for the lack of difference in outcome between the groups.

There were significantly fewer successful vaginal deliveries in primiparous women than in multiparous women. In addition, median parity was significantly lower in the handicapped group which had delivered vaginally than in the non-handicapped group. There were no differences in mean birth weight or maternal height between these two groups. These data support suggestions that parity may be important in determining outcome.¹⁴

Of the 12 severely handicapped infants in the planned vaginal delivery group, in only one could the handicap be attributed to difficulty with delivery. Though two further infants had abnormal fetal heart rates which were not acted on promptly, this is not a problem associated only with breech presentation. Arguably elective caesarean section would pre-empt such events, but possibly they emphasise that an experienced obstetrician should be present on the labour ward.¹⁵ Congenital handicap should be considered before a policy of universal elective caesarean section is proposed; three severely handicapped infants in this study who were delivered by elective caesarean section had congenital anomalies (in the same time period five infants with lethal malformations were also delivered by elective caesarean section).¹¹

So far as we know this is the largest investigation of the long term outcome of breech presentation by intended method of delivery. Some cases will have been lost to follow up but this should have no effect on the proportions of the intended modes of delivery. However, as a retrospective study potential bias in case selection cannot be excluded; we cannot say that these particular babies would not have done better had they been delivered by elective caesarean section. A large prospective randomised controlled trial with long term follow up is still required to provide more definitive information about the safest method of delivering a fetus in breech presentation at term. Meanwhile, it seems that a policy of selective planned vaginal delivery is not associated with an increased risk of long term infant morbidity.

We thank Dr Doris Campbell for identifying the cohort; Dr A D Kindley, of the Raeden Centre, Aberdeen, for access to the computer database; Grampian Healthcare Trust for access to health visitor records; and Dr S Roger and colleagues, of Grampian Healthcare Trust, for invaluable help in searching health visitor records.

Funding: JW received a grant from the Scottish Office Home and Health Department.

Conflict of interest: None.

1. Wright RC. Reduction of perinatal mortality and morbidity in breech delivery through routine use of cesarean section. Obstet Gynecol 1959;14:758-63. [Medline]
2. Lyons ER, Papsin FR. Cesarean section in the management of breech presentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1978;130:558-61. [Medline]
3. Bingham P, Lilford RJ. Management of the selected term breech presentation: assessment of the risks of selected vaginal delivery versus cesarean section for all cases. Obstet Gynecol 1987;69:965-78. [Medline]
4. Collea JV, Chein C, Quilligan EJ. The randomized management of term frank breech presentation: a study of 208 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1980;137:235-44. [Medline]
5. Rosen MG, Chik L. The effect of delivery route on outcome in breech presentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984;148:909-14. [Medline]
6. Myers SA, Gliecher N. Breech delivery: why the dilemma? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;155:6-10.
7. Cheng M, Hannah M. Breech delivery at term: a critical review of the literature. Obstet Gynecol 1993;82:605-18. [Medline]
8. Ohlsen H. Outcome of term breech delivery in primigravidae. A feto-pelvic breech index. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1975;54:165-71. [Medline]
9. Bistoletti P, Nisell H, Palme C, Lagercrantz H. Term breech delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1981;60:165-71. [Medline]
10. Svenningsen NW, Westgren M, Ingemarsson I. Modern strategy for the term breech delivery--a study with a 4-year follow-up of the infants. J Perinat Med 1985;13:117-26. [Medline]
11. Hall MH, Lang GD, Campbell DM. Outcome of breech delivery at term. BMJ 1993;306:718.
12. Hall MH, Carr-Hill R. Impact of sex ratio on onset and management of labour. BMJ 1982;285:401-3.
13. Faber-Nijolt R, Huisjes HJ, Touwen BCL, Fidler VJ. Neurological follow-up of 281 children born in breech presentation: a controlled study. BMJ 1983;286:9-12.
14. Byrne P. Outcome of breech delivery at term. BMJ 1992;305:1092. [Free Full Text]
15. Savage W, Gordon Y, Haddad F. Outcome of breech delivery at term. BMJ 1992;305:1092.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Maternal and paternal contribution to intergenerational recurrence of breech delivery: population based cohort study

Tone Irene Nordtveit, Kari Klungsoyr Melve, Susanne Albrechtsen, and Rolv Skjaerven
BMJ 2008 336: 872-876. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Long term outcome by method of delivery of fetuses in breech presentation

Jonathan West
BMJ 1996 313: 817. [Extract] [Full Text]

External cephalic version at term should be considered

P S Bhal, K Asaad, A Sharma, and R W Shaw
BMJ 1996 313: 817. [Extract] [Full Text]

Outcomes of breech presentations not diagnosed until labour need to be studied

Sarah Vause
BMJ 1996 313: 817. [Extract] [Full Text]

Evaluation should have included long term follow up of the mothers

Geraldine Barrett and Christina R Victor
BMJ 1996 313: 817-818. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Pasupathy, D., Wood, A. M, Pell, J. P, Fleming, M., Smith, G. C. (2009). Time trend in the risk of delivery-related perinatal and neonatal death associated with breech presentation at term. Int J Epidemiol 38: 490-498 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Nordtveit, T. I., Melve, K. K., Albrechtsen, S., Skjaerven, R. (2008). Maternal and paternal contribution to intergenerational recurrence of breech delivery: population based cohort study. BMJ 336: 872-876 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Kotaska, A. (2004). Inappropriate use of randomised trials to evaluate complex phenomena: case study of vaginal breech delivery. BMJ 329: 1039-1042 [Full text]  
• West, J. (1996). Long term outcome by method of delivery of fetuses in breech presentation. BMJ 313: 817-817 [Full text]  
• Bhal, P S, Asaad, K, Sharma, A, Shaw, R W (1996). External cephalic version at term should be considered. BMJ 313: 817a-817 [Full text]  
• Vause, S. (1996). Outcomes of breech presentations not diagnosed until labour need to be studied. BMJ 313: 817b-817 [Full text]  
• Barrett, G., Victor, C. R (1996). Evaluation should have included long term follow up of the mothers. BMJ 313: 817c-818 [Full text]  
• Hannah, M, Hannah, W (1996). Caesarean section or vaginal birth for breech presentation at term. BMJ 312: 1433-1434 [Full text]