Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery

Maged Costantine, Karin Fox, Benjamin D. Byers, Julio Mateus, Labib M. Ghulmiyyah, Sean Blackwell, Gary Hankins, William A. Grobman, George Saade

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

52 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To validate a previously developed vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) prediction model using a patient cohort different than that from which it was derived. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of all term pregnant women (January 2002-August 2007) with one prior low transverse cesarean delivery attempting a trial of labor. Variables used in the final prediction model (maternal age, prepregnancy body mass index, ethnicity, prior vaginal delivery, prior VBAC, and indication for prior cesarean delivery) were extracted from medical records and used to calculate an individual woman's predicted VBAC success rate. These rates at the level of the study population then were partitioned into deciles and compared with the actual VBAC rates. RESULTS: Of 545 women who fit the inclusion criteria, 502 had complete data available. A total of 262 (52.2%) had VBAC. The predicted probability of VBAC, as calculated by the regression equation, was significantly higher in those who had a successful trial of labor (median 78.4%, interquartile range 62.1-88.2) than in those who did not (median 59.7%, interquartile range 50.8-75.3, P<.001). The predictive model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.74, P<.001 ), which was similar to that originally described. The actual VBAC rates did not differ from the predicted rates when the predicted chance of success was less than 50%. Above a 50% predicted success, the achieved success rates were consistently 10-20% lower. CONCLUSION: The published nomogram is predictive of VBAC success. It may help pregnant women contemplating a trial of labor reach a more informed decision.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1029-1033
Number of pages5
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Volume114
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Vaginal Birth after Cesarean
Trial of Labor
Pregnant Women
Nomograms
Maternal Age
ROC Curve
Medical Records
Body Mass Index
Cohort Studies
Confidence Intervals

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Costantine, M., Fox, K., Byers, B. D., Mateus, J., Ghulmiyyah, L. M., Blackwell, S., ... Saade, G. (2009). Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 114(5), 1029-1033. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bb0dde

Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. / Costantine, Maged; Fox, Karin; Byers, Benjamin D.; Mateus, Julio; Ghulmiyyah, Labib M.; Blackwell, Sean; Hankins, Gary; Grobman, William A.; Saade, George.

In: Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 114, No. 5, 11.2009, p. 1029-1033.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Costantine, M, Fox, K, Byers, BD, Mateus, J, Ghulmiyyah, LM, Blackwell, S, Hankins, G, Grobman, WA & Saade, G 2009, 'Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery', Obstetrics and Gynecology, vol. 114, no. 5, pp. 1029-1033. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bb0dde
Costantine M, Fox K, Byers BD, Mateus J, Ghulmiyyah LM, Blackwell S et al. Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009 Nov;114(5):1029-1033. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bb0dde
Costantine, Maged ; Fox, Karin ; Byers, Benjamin D. ; Mateus, Julio ; Ghulmiyyah, Labib M. ; Blackwell, Sean ; Hankins, Gary ; Grobman, William A. ; Saade, George. / Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. In: Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009 ; Vol. 114, No. 5. pp. 1029-1033.
@article{8c03f58dcd12415c9ca725a0a7bb8318,
title = "Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To validate a previously developed vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) prediction model using a patient cohort different than that from which it was derived. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of all term pregnant women (January 2002-August 2007) with one prior low transverse cesarean delivery attempting a trial of labor. Variables used in the final prediction model (maternal age, prepregnancy body mass index, ethnicity, prior vaginal delivery, prior VBAC, and indication for prior cesarean delivery) were extracted from medical records and used to calculate an individual woman's predicted VBAC success rate. These rates at the level of the study population then were partitioned into deciles and compared with the actual VBAC rates. RESULTS: Of 545 women who fit the inclusion criteria, 502 had complete data available. A total of 262 (52.2{\%}) had VBAC. The predicted probability of VBAC, as calculated by the regression equation, was significantly higher in those who had a successful trial of labor (median 78.4{\%}, interquartile range 62.1-88.2) than in those who did not (median 59.7{\%}, interquartile range 50.8-75.3, P<.001). The predictive model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.70 (95{\%} confidence interval 0.65-0.74, P<.001 ), which was similar to that originally described. The actual VBAC rates did not differ from the predicted rates when the predicted chance of success was less than 50{\%}. Above a 50{\%} predicted success, the achieved success rates were consistently 10-20{\%} lower. CONCLUSION: The published nomogram is predictive of VBAC success. It may help pregnant women contemplating a trial of labor reach a more informed decision.",
author = "Maged Costantine and Karin Fox and Byers, {Benjamin D.} and Julio Mateus and Ghulmiyyah, {Labib M.} and Sean Blackwell and Gary Hankins and Grobman, {William A.} and George Saade",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bb0dde",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "114",
pages = "1029--1033",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery

AU - Costantine, Maged

AU - Fox, Karin

AU - Byers, Benjamin D.

AU - Mateus, Julio

AU - Ghulmiyyah, Labib M.

AU - Blackwell, Sean

AU - Hankins, Gary

AU - Grobman, William A.

AU - Saade, George

PY - 2009/11

Y1 - 2009/11

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To validate a previously developed vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) prediction model using a patient cohort different than that from which it was derived. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of all term pregnant women (January 2002-August 2007) with one prior low transverse cesarean delivery attempting a trial of labor. Variables used in the final prediction model (maternal age, prepregnancy body mass index, ethnicity, prior vaginal delivery, prior VBAC, and indication for prior cesarean delivery) were extracted from medical records and used to calculate an individual woman's predicted VBAC success rate. These rates at the level of the study population then were partitioned into deciles and compared with the actual VBAC rates. RESULTS: Of 545 women who fit the inclusion criteria, 502 had complete data available. A total of 262 (52.2%) had VBAC. The predicted probability of VBAC, as calculated by the regression equation, was significantly higher in those who had a successful trial of labor (median 78.4%, interquartile range 62.1-88.2) than in those who did not (median 59.7%, interquartile range 50.8-75.3, P<.001). The predictive model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.74, P<.001 ), which was similar to that originally described. The actual VBAC rates did not differ from the predicted rates when the predicted chance of success was less than 50%. Above a 50% predicted success, the achieved success rates were consistently 10-20% lower. CONCLUSION: The published nomogram is predictive of VBAC success. It may help pregnant women contemplating a trial of labor reach a more informed decision.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To validate a previously developed vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) prediction model using a patient cohort different than that from which it was derived. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of all term pregnant women (January 2002-August 2007) with one prior low transverse cesarean delivery attempting a trial of labor. Variables used in the final prediction model (maternal age, prepregnancy body mass index, ethnicity, prior vaginal delivery, prior VBAC, and indication for prior cesarean delivery) were extracted from medical records and used to calculate an individual woman's predicted VBAC success rate. These rates at the level of the study population then were partitioned into deciles and compared with the actual VBAC rates. RESULTS: Of 545 women who fit the inclusion criteria, 502 had complete data available. A total of 262 (52.2%) had VBAC. The predicted probability of VBAC, as calculated by the regression equation, was significantly higher in those who had a successful trial of labor (median 78.4%, interquartile range 62.1-88.2) than in those who did not (median 59.7%, interquartile range 50.8-75.3, P<.001). The predictive model had an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.65-0.74, P<.001 ), which was similar to that originally described. The actual VBAC rates did not differ from the predicted rates when the predicted chance of success was less than 50%. Above a 50% predicted success, the achieved success rates were consistently 10-20% lower. CONCLUSION: The published nomogram is predictive of VBAC success. It may help pregnant women contemplating a trial of labor reach a more informed decision.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=73549114669&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=73549114669&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bb0dde

DO - 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bb0dde

M3 - Article

C2 - 20168103

AN - SCOPUS:73549114669

VL - 114

SP - 1029

EP - 1033

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 5

ER -