Development of a Risk Score to Predict the Vacuum Extraction Failure

NCT ID: NCT03853499

Last Updated: 2019-02-25

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Total Enrollment

1743 participants

Study Classification

OBSERVATIONAL

Study Start Date

2017-07-29

Study Completion Date

2017-11-20

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Safe operative vaginal delivery requires a careful assessment of the clinical situation.

During the pushing efforts, the complexity of the delivery can lead to choose between an operative vaginal delivery attempt and a caesarean section straightaway. An emergency caesarean section for failed operative vaginal delivery is associated with a higher fetal and maternal morbidity, compared to a successful operative vaginal delivery and to a caesarean section straightaway.

The objective of this study was to develop a risk score of failed vacuum extraction leading to an emergency caesarean section.

This score could be an objective tool to help the obstetricians to choose between a vacuum extraction attempt and a caesarean section straightaway.

The investigators included patients who benefited from a vacuum extraction attempt in the Regional Teaching Hospital of Besançon (France) between January 2010 and December 2015. Patients were separated into two groups : the vacuum extraction failure group and the vacuum extraction success group.

The investigators selected maternal, fetal and labor characteristics which could influence success or failure of the vacuum extraction and compared them between the two groups.

The score was developed with the characteristics which significantly influence the vacuum extraction failure.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Safe operative vaginal delivery requires a careful assessment of the clinical situation.

During the pushing efforts, the complexity of the delivery can lead to choose between an operative vaginal delivery attempt and a caesarean section straightaway. An emergency caesarean section for failed operative vaginal delivery is associated with a higher fetal and maternal morbidity, compared to a successful operative vaginal delivery and to a caesarean section straightaway.

The objective of this study was to develop a risk score of failed vacuum extraction leading to an emergency caesarean section.

This score could be an objective tool to help the obstetricians to choose between a vacuum extraction attempt and a caesarean section straightaway.

The investigators included patients who benefited from a vacuum extraction attempt in the Regional Teaching Hospital of Besançon (France) between January 2010 and December 2015. Patients were separated into two groups : the vacuum extraction failure group and the vacuum extraction success group.

The investigators selected maternal, fetal and labor characteristics which could influence success or failure of the vacuum extraction and compared them between the two groups.

The score was developed with the characteristics which significantly influence the vacuum extraction failure.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Vacuum Extraction

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Observational Model Type

CASE_CONTROL

Study Time Perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Successful vacuum extraction

Patients for whom vacuum extraction was successful

No intervention (observational study)

Intervention Type OTHER

No intervention (observational study)

Failed vacuum extraction

Patients who had an emergency caesarean section after failed vacuum extraction

No intervention (observational study)

Intervention Type OTHER

No intervention (observational study)

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

No intervention (observational study)

No intervention (observational study)

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* delivery in the Regional Teaching Hospital of Besançon (France) between January 2010 and December 2015
* from 37 weeks of amenorrhea
* cephalic presentation
* epidural anesthesia
* vacuum extraction attempt (failure or success)
Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besancon

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University Hospital of Besançon

Besançon, , France

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

France

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Verhoeven CJ, Nuij C, Janssen-Rolf CR, Schuit E, Bais JM, Oei SG, Mol BW. Predictors for failure of vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery: a case-control study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 May;200:29-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.02.008. Epub 2016 Mar 2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26967343 (View on PubMed)

Miot S, Riethmuller D, Deleplancque K, Teffaud O, Martin M, Maillet R, Schaal JP. [Cesarean section for failed vacuum extraction: risk factors and maternal and neonatal outcomes]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2004 Jul-Aug;32(7-8):607-12. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2004.04.003. French.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15450259 (View on PubMed)

Palatnik A, Grobman WA, Hellendag MG, Janetos TM, Gossett DR, Miller ES. Predictors of Failed Operative Vaginal Delivery in a Contemporary Obstetric Cohort. Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Mar;127(3):501-506. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001273.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26855108 (View on PubMed)

Alexander JM, Leveno KJ, Hauth JC, Landon MB, Gilbert S, Spong CY, Varner MW, Caritis SN, Meis P, Wapner RJ, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, O'Sullivan MJ, Sibai BM, Langer O, Gabbe SG; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU). Failed operative vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Nov;114(5):1017-1022. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181bbf3be.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 20168101 (View on PubMed)

Langeron A, Mercier G, Chauleur C, Varlet MN, Patural H, Lima S, Seffert P, Chene G. [Failed forceps extraction: risk factors and maternal and neonatal morbidity]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2012 Jun;41(4):333-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2011.11.001. Epub 2012 Jan 9. French.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 22227232 (View on PubMed)

Gopalani S, Bennett K, Critchlow C. Factors predictive of failed operative vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Sep;191(3):896-902. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.05.073.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15467561 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

P/2017/326

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.