Search

Background: During the second stage of labor, in case of a need for a fetal extraction at midcavity, the choice of attempting the procedure between operative vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery is difficult. Moreover, guidelines on this subject are not clear., Objective: This study aimed to identify antenatal and intrapartum parameters associated with a failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery and its association with maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes., Study Design: This was a single-center, retrospective, cohort study conducted at a tertiary maternity hospital in France from January 2010 to December 2020. Women with singleton pregnancies under epidural analgesia with nonanomalous cephalic presenting fetuses and gestational ages at ≥37 weeks of gestation, who were submitted to midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery, were included. Following the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists definition, midcavity was defined as the presenting part of the fetus (ie, the fetal head) found at stations 0 and +1. For research purposes, all patients were submitted to transperineal ultrasound to evaluate the head-to-perineum distance, however, this measurement did not affect the decision to perform a midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery. The primary outcome of the study was failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery leading to cesarean delivery or the use of a different instrument to achieve vaginal delivery., Results: Overall, 951 cases of midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery were included in this study. Failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery occurred in 242 patients (25.4%). Factors independently associated with failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery included maternal height (adjusted odds ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.99; P=.002), duration of the active phase of the first stage of labor (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.17; P<.001), nonocciput anterior fetal head position (adjusted odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.04; P=.02), z score of the head-to-perineum distance (adjusted odds ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.43; P=.01), and birthweight of >4000 g (adjusted odds ratio, 2.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-3.26; P=.003). Women submitted to a failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery were more likely to have a major postpartum hemorrhage (7.1% vs 2.0%; P<.001), whereas neonates were more likely to have an umbilical artery pH of <7.1 (30.5% vs 19.8%; P=.001), be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (9.6% vs 4.7%; P=.005), and have a severe caput succedaneum (14.9% vs 0.7%; P<.001). Subgroup analysis on all patients with a fetal head station of 0 found that the head-to-perineum distance was the only independent variable associated with failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery (adjusted odds ratio, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-2.12; P<.001). The area under the receiving operating characteristic curve of the head-to-perineum distance in this subgroup population was 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.73; P<.001), and the optimal cutoff point of the head-to-perineum distance measurement discriminating between failed and successful midcavity vacuum-assisted deliveries was 55 mm. It was associated with a 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95) sensitivity, 0.19 (95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.25) specificity, 0.36 (95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.42) positive predictive value, and 0.80 (95% confidence interval, 0.66-0.90) negative predictive value., Conclusion: Study data showed that a high fetal head station, measured using the head-to-perineum distance, and a nonocciput anterior position of the fetal head are independently associated with failed midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery. The result supported the systematic assessment of the sonographic head station and position before performing a midcavity vacuum-assisted delivery., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)