Outcomes of non-vertex second twins, following vertex vaginal delivery of first twin: a secondary analysis of the WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Jon Barrett²  João Paulo Souza³  Guillermo Carroli¹  Cristina Cuesta¹  Erica Holloway²  Joshua P Vogel³ 

[1] Centro Rosarino de Estudios Perinatales, Rosario, Santa Fe, Argentina;Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada;UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Avenue Appia 20, Geneva CH-1211, Switzerland

关键词: Vertex;    Twin;    Maternal and perinatal outcomes;    Fetal presentation;   

Others  :  1128556
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2393-14-55

 received in 2013-06-04, accepted in 2014-01-24,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Mode of delivery remains a topic of debate in vertex/non-vertex twin pregnancies. We used the WHO Global Survey dataset to determine the risk of adverse maternal/perinatal outcomes associated with presentation of the second twin, following vaginal delivery of a vertex first twin.

Methods

We analysed a derived dataset of twin pregnancies ≥ 32 weeks gestation where the first twin was vertex and delivered vaginally. Maternal, delivery and neonatal characteristics and adverse outcomes were reported by presentation of the second twin. Logistic regression models (adjusted for maternal and perinatal confounders, mode of delivery and region) were developed to determine odds of adverse outcomes associated with presentation.

Results

1,424 twin pregnancies were included, 25.9% of these had a non-vertex second twin and Caesarean was more common in non-vertex presentations (6.2% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001). While the odds of Apgar < 7 at 5 minutes were higher in non-vertex presenting second twins (16.0% vs 11.4%, AOR 1.42 95% CI 1.01-2.00), the odds of maternal ICU admission (4.6% vs 1.7%, AOR 1.30, 95% CI 0.88-1.94), blood transfusion (6.0% vs 3.4%, AOR 1.23, 95% CI 0.67-2.25), stillbirth (7.6% vs 4.7%, AOR 1.15, 95% CI 0.72-1.73), early neonatal death (3.8% vs 2.1%, AOR 1.68, 95% CI 0.96-2.94), and NICU admission (26.6% vs 23.2%, AOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.62-1.39) were not.

Conclusion

After a vaginal delivery of a vertex first twin, non-vertex presentation of the second twin is associated with increased odds of Apgar <7 at 5 minutes, but not of other maternal/perinatal outcomes. Presentation of the second twin is not as important a consideration in planning twin vaginal birth as previously considered.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Vogel et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Saigal S, Willan AR: Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2000, 356:9-9.
• [2]Smith GCS, Pell JP, Dobbie R: Birth order, gestational age, and risk of delivery related perinatal death in twins: retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2002, 325:1004-1004.
• [3]Boggess KA, Chisholm CA: Delivery of the nonvertex second twin: a review of the literature. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1997, 52:728-735.
• [4]Chervenak FA, Johnson RE, Berkowitz RL, Hobbins JC: Intrapartum external version of the second twin. Obstet Gynecol 1983, 62:160-165.
• [5]Armson BA, O’Connell C, Persad V, Joseph KS, Young DC, Baskett TF: Determinants of perinatal mortality and serious neonatal morbidity in the second twin. Obstet Gynecol 2006, 108:556-564.
• [6]Wen SW, Fung K, Oppenheimer L, Demissie K, Yang Q, Walker M: Neonatal mortality in second twin according to cause of death, gestational age, and mode of delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004, 191:773-783.
• [7]Yang Q, Wen SW, Chen Y, Krewski D, Fung KFK, Walker M: Occurrence and clinical predictors of operative delivery for the vertex second twin after normal vaginal delivery of the first twin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004, 192:7-7.
• [8]Smith GCS, Shah I, White IR, Pell JP, Dobbie R: Mode of delivery and the risk of delivery-related perinatal death among twins at term: a retrospective cohort study of 8073 births. BJOG: Int J Obstetr Gynaecol 2005, 112:1139-1144.
• [9]Rabinovici J, Barkai G, Reichman B, Serr DM, Mashiach S: Randomized management of the second nonvertex twin: vaginal delivery or cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986, 156:52-56.
• [10]Crowther CA: Caesarean delivery for the second twin. Cochrane Db Syst Rev 2000, (2):CD000047-CD000047.
• [11]Barrett JFR, Hannah ME, Hutton EK, Willan AR, Allen AC, Armson BA, Gafni A, Joseph KS, Mason D, Ohlsson A, Ross S, Sanchez JJ, Asztalos EV, Asztalos EV: A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2013, 369:1295-1305.
• [12]Requejo J, Bryce J, Victora C: Countdown to 2015: Building a Future for Women and Children. Washington DC: World Health Organization and UNICEF; 2012.
• [13]Smits J, Monden C: Twinning across the developing world. Plos One 2011, 6:e25239.
• [14]Villar J, Valladares E, Wojdyla D, Zavaleta N, Carroli G, Velazco A, Shah A, Campodónico L, Bataglia V, Faundes A, Langer A, Narvaez A, Donner A, Romero M, Reynoso S, de Pádua KS, Giordano D, Kublickas M, Acosta A: Caesarean delivery rates and pregnancy outcomes: the, WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet 2006, 367:1819-1829.
• [15]Shah A, Faundes A, Machoki M, Bataglia V, Amokrane F, Donner A, Mugerwa K, Carroli G, Fawole B, Langer A, Wolombyk JJ, Naravaez A, Nafiou I, Kublickas M, Valladares E, Velasco A, Zavaleta N, Neves I, Villar J: Methodological considerations in implementing the WHO Global Survey for Monitoring Maternal and Perinatal Health. Bull World Health Organ 2008, 86:126-131.
• [16]IBM Corporation: PASW Statistics 20. Available: https://www.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/ webcite
• [17]Wen SW, Fung KFK, Oppenheimer L, Demissie K, Yang Q, Walker M: Occurrence and predictors of cesarean delivery for the second twin after vaginal delivery of the first twin. Obstet Gynecol 2004, 103:413-419.
• [18]Gibbons L, Belizan J, Lauer J, Betran A: Inequities in the use of caesarean sections in the World. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012, 206:331.
• [19]Vogel JP, Torloni MR, Seuc A, Betrán AP, Widmer M, Souza JP, Merialdi M: Maternal and perinatal outcomes of twin pregnancy in 23 low- and middle-income countries. Plos One 2013, 8:e70549-e70549.
• [20]Peaceman AM, Kuo L, Feinglass J: Infant morbidity and mortality associated with vaginal delivery in twin gestations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009, 200:0-0.
• [21]Herbst A, Källén K: Influence of mode of delivery on neonatal mortality in the second twin, at and before term. BJOG 2008, 115:1512-1517.
• [22]Schmitz T, de Carné Carnavalet C, Azria E, Lopez E, Cabrol D, Goffinet F: Neonatal outcomes of twin pregnancy according to the planned mode of delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008, 111:695-703.
• [23]Minakami H, Sato I: Reestimating date of delivery in multifetal pregnancies. JAMA 1996, 275:1432-1434.
• [24]Kingdom JC, Nevo O, Murphy K: Discordant growth in twins. Prenat Diagn 2005, 25:759-765.
• [25]Rossi AC, Mullin PM, Chmait RH: Neonatal outcomes of twins according to birth order, presentation and mode of delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG: Int J Obstetr Gynaecol 2011, 118:523-532.
• [26]Bisschop CNCS, Vogelvang TET, May AMA, Schuitemaker NWEN: Mode of delivery in non-cephalic presenting twins: a systematic review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012, 286:237-247.
• [27]Trevett T, Johnson A: Monochorionic twin pregnancies. Clin Perinatol 2005, 32:475. viii