INTERIM UPDATE
CommitteeOpinion2017
Number 745
(Replaces Committee Opinion Number 340, July 2006)


Committee on Obstetric Practice
This Committee Opinion was developed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Obstetric Practice.

This information is designed as an educational resource to aid clinicians in providing obstetric and gynecologic care, and use of this information is voluntary. This information should not be considered as inclusive of all proper treatments or methods of care or as a statement of the standard of care. It is not intended to substitute for the independent professional judgment of the treating clinician. Variations in practice may be warranted when, in the reasonable judgment of the treating clinician, such course of action is indicated by the condition of the patient, limitations of available resources, or advances in knowledge or technology. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists reviews its publications regularly; however, its publications may not reflect the most recent evidence. Any updates to this document can be found on www.acog.org or by calling the ACOG Resource Center.

While ACOG makes every effort to present accurate and reliable information, this publication is provided “as is” without any warranty of accuracy, reliability, or otherwise, either express or implied. ACOG does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse the products or services of any firm, organization, or person. Neither ACOG nor its officers, directors, members, employees, or agents will be liable for any loss, damage, or claim with respect to any liabilities, including direct, special, indirect, or consequential damages, incurred in connection with this publication or reliance on the information presented.

All ACOG committee members and authors have submitted a conflict of interest disclosure statement related to this published product. Any potential conflicts have been considered and managed in accordance with ACOG’s Conflict of Interest Disclosure Policy. The ACOG policies can be found on acog.org. For products jointly developed with other organizations, conflict of interest disclosures by representatives of the other organizations are addressed by those organizations. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has neither solicited nor accepted any commercial involvement in the development of the content of this published product.


INTERIM UPDATE: This Committee Opinion is updated as highlighted to reflect a limited, focused change in the evidence regarding external cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Additional updates have been made to reflect current practice regarding vaginal breech delivery.


PDF Format

Mode of Term Singleton Breech Delivery

ABSTRACT: There is a trend in the United States to perform cesarean delivery for term singleton fetuses in a breech presentation. The number of practitioners with the skills and experience to perform vaginal breech delivery has decreased. The decision regarding the mode of delivery should consider patient wishes and the experience of the health care provider. Obstetrician–gynecologists and other obstetric care providers should offer external cephalic version as an alternative to planned cesarean for a woman who has a term singleton breech fetus, desires a planned vaginal delivery of a vertex-presenting fetus, and has no contraindications. External cephalic version should be attempted only in settings in which cesarean delivery services are readily available. Planned vaginal delivery of a term singleton breech fetus may be reasonable under hospital-specific protocol guidelines for eligibility and labor management. If a vaginal breech delivery is planned, a detailed informed consent should be documented—including risks that perinatal or neonatal mortality or short-term serious neonatal morbidity may be higher than if a cesarean delivery is planned.


Recommendations

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists makes the following recommendations:

  • The decision regarding the mode of delivery should consider patient wishes and the experience of the health care provider.
  • Obstetrician–gynecologists and other obstetric care providers should offer external cephalic version as an alternative to planned cesarean for a woman who has a term singleton breech fetus, desires a planned vaginal delivery of a vertex-presenting fetus, and has no contraindications. External cephalic version should be attempted only in settings in which cesarean delivery services are readily available.
  • Planned vaginal delivery of a term singleton breech fetus may be reasonable under hospital-specific protocol guidelines for eligibility and labor management.
  • If a vaginal breech delivery is planned, a detailed informed consent should be documented—including risks that perinatal or neonatal mortality or short-term serious neonatal morbidity may be higher than if a cesarean delivery is planned.

There is a trend in the United States to perform cesarean delivery for term singleton fetuses in a breech presentation. In 2002, the rate of cesarean deliveries for women in labor with breech presentation was 86.9% (1). The number of practitioners with the skills and experience to perform vaginal breech delivery has decreased. Even in academic medical centers where faculty support for teaching vaginal breech delivery to residents remains high, there may be insufficient volume of vaginal breech deliveries to adequately teach this procedure (2).

In 2000, researchers conducted a large, international multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing a policy of planned cesarean delivery with planned vaginal delivery (Term Breech Trial) (3). These investigators noted that perinatal mortality, neonatal mortality, and serious neonatal morbidity were significantly lower among the planned cesarean delivery group compared with the planned vaginal delivery group (17/1,039 [1.6%] versus 52/1,039 [5%]), although there was no difference in maternal morbidity or mortality observed between the groups (3). The benefits of planned cesarean delivery remained for all subgroups identified by the baseline variables (eg, older and younger women, nulliparous and multiparous women, frank and complete type of breech presentation). They found that the reduction in risk attributable to planned cesarean delivery was greatest among centers in industrialized nations with low overall perinatal mortality rates (0.4% versus 5.7%). In countries with low perinatal mortality rates, the reduction in risk was driven primarily by the pooled rates of perinatal or neonatal mortality and serious neonatal morbidity, rather than by the rates of mortality alone (0% versus 0.6%). Given the results of this exceptionally large and well-controlled clinical trial, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' Committee on Obstetric Practice in 2001 recommended that planned vaginal delivery of a term singleton breech was no longer appropriate.

Since that time, there have been additional publications that modify the original conclusions of the 2000 Term Breech Trial. The same researchers have published three follow-up studies examining maternal outcomes at 3 months postpartum, as well as outcomes for mothers and children 2 years after the births (4–6). At 3 months postpartum, the risk of urinary incontinence was lower for women in the planned cesarean delivery group; however, there was no difference at 2 years. At
2 years postpartum, the majority of women (79.1%) did not report a difference for most maternal parameters, including breastfeeding, pain, depression, menstrual problems, fatigue, and distressing memories of the birth experience
(5).

The follow-up study to address outcomes of the children at 2 years involved 85 centers (with both high and low perinatal mortality rates) that were chosen at the start of the original trial. Most children, 923 of 1,159 (79.6%) of the infants born in the original study, were assessed first by a screening questionnaire (Ages and Stages) that was completed by their parents (4). All abnormal results were further evaluated with a clinical neurodevelopment assessment. The risk of death or neurodevelopmental delay was no different in the planned cesarean delivery group compared with the planned vaginal delivery group (14 children [3.1%] versus 13 children [2.8%]; relative risk, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.52–2.30; P=0.85). There are several explanations for this seemingly contradictory finding. The follow-up study was underpowered to show a clinically important benefit from cesarean delivery if this were true. Only 6 of the 16 infants who died in the neonatal period were from centers participating in the follow-up to 2 years (one in the planned cesarean delivery group, five in the planned vaginal delivery group), and most of the children with serious neonatal morbidity after birth survived and developed normally. In this cohort, 17 out of 18 children with serious morbidity in the original study were normal at this 24-month follow-up. Another explanation is that the use of pooled mortality and morbidity data at the time of birth overstated the true long-term risks of vaginal delivery (7).

A recent retrospective observational report reviewed neonatal outcomes in the Netherlands before and after the publication of the Term Breech Trial (8). Between 1998 and 2002, 35,453 term infants were delivered. The cesarean delivery rate for breech presentation increased from 50% to 80% within 2 months of the trial's publication and remained elevated. The combined neonatal mortality rate decreased from 0.35% to 0.18%, and the incidence of reported birth trauma decreased from 0.29% to 0.08%. Of interest, a decrease in mortality also was seen in the emergency cesarean delivery group and the vaginal delivery group, a finding that the authors attribute to better selection of candidates for vaginal breech delivery.

Obstetrician–gynecologists and other obstetric care providers should offer external cephalic version as an alternative to planned cesarean for a woman who has a term singleton breech fetus, desires a planned vaginal delivery of a vertex-presenting fetus, and has no contraindications (9). A meta-analysis of eight randomized controlled trials demonstrated that performing external cephalic version led to a statistically and clinically significant reduction in cesarean delivery of 43% (95% CI, 40–82%) with no significant differences in maternal or fetal complications (10). The studies included in this meta-analysis did not employ analgesia for the external cephalic version. A systematic review and meta-analysis of six randomized controlled trials found that using epidural or spinal anesthesia significantly increased the success rate of external cephalic version from 37.6% to 59.7% (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.29–1.93), number needed to treat=5. The frequency of adverse events was not significantly different between groups receiving and not receiving regional anesthesia for external cephalic version (11). External cephalic version should be attempted only in settings in which cesarean delivery services are readily available (9).

Planned vaginal delivery of a term singleton breech fetus may be reasonable under hospital-specific protocol guidelines for both eligibility and labor management. There are many retrospective reports of vaginal breech delivery that follow very specific protocols and note excellent neonatal outcomes. One report noted 298 women in a vaginal breech trial with no perinatal morbidity and mortality (12). Another report noted similar outcomes in 481 women with planned vaginal delivery (13). Although they are not randomized trials, these reports detail the outcomes of specific management protocols and document the potential safety of a vaginal delivery in the properly selected patient. The initial criteria used in these reports were similar: gestational age greater than 37 weeks, frank or complete breech presentation, no fetal anomalies on ultrasound examination, adequate maternal pelvis, and estimated fetal weight between 2,500 g and 4,000 g. In addition, the protocol presented by one report required documentation of fetal head flexion and adequate amniotic fluid volume, defined as a 3-cm vertical pocket (12). Oxytocin induction or augmentation was not offered, and strict criteria were established for normal labor progress. If a vaginal breech delivery is planned, a detailed informed consent should be documented—including risks that perinatal or neonatal mortality or short-term serious neonatal morbidity may be higher than if a cesarean delivery is planned.

Current evidence demonstrates short-term benefits in neonatal and maternal morbidity and mortality from planned cesarean delivery of the term fetus with a breech presentation. Long-term benefits of planned cesarean delivery for these infants and women are less clear (14, 15). Offering external cephalic version provides an opportunity to potentially reduce cesarean delivery for these pregnancies (10, 16). Finally, a planned vaginal delivery of a term singleton breech fetus may be reasonable under hospital-specific guidelines (12, 13). The decision regarding the mode of delivery should consider patient wishes and the experience of the health care provider.

In light of the recent publications that further clarify the long-term risks of vaginal breech delivery, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Obstetric Practice issues the following recommendations:

  • The decision regarding the mode of delivery should depend on the experience of the health care provider. Cesarean delivery will be the preferred mode of delivery for most physicians because of the diminishing expertise in vaginal breech delivery.
  • Obstetricians should offer and perform external cephalic version whenever possible.
  • Planned vaginal delivery of a term singleton breech fetus may be reasonable under hospital-specific protocol guidelines for both eligibility and labor management.
  • In those instances in which breech vaginal deliveries are pursued, great caution should be exercised, and detailed patient informed consent should be documented.
  • Before embarking on a plan for a vaginal breech delivery, women should be informed that the risk of perinatal or neonatal mortality or short-term serious neonatal morbidity may be higher than if a cesarean delivery is planned.
  • There are no recent data to support the recommendation of cesarean delivery to patients whose second twin is in a nonvertex presentation, although a large multicenter randomized controlled trial is in progress (http://www.utoronto.ca/ miru/tbs).

References

  1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Munson ML. Births: final data for 2002. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2003;52(10):1–113.
  2. Lavin JP Jr, Eaton J, Hopkins M. Teaching vaginal breech delivery and external cephalic version. A survey of faculty attitudes. J Reprod Med 2000;45:808–12.
  3. 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. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Lancet 2000;356:1375–83.
  4. Whyte H, Hannah ME, Saigal S, Hannah WJ, Hewson S, Amankwah K, et al. Outcomes of children at 2 years after planned cesarean birth versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the International Randomized Term Breech Trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:864–71.
  5. Hannah ME, Whyte H, Hannah WJ, Hewson S, Amankwah K, Cheng M, et al. Maternal outcomes at 2 years after planned cesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: the international randomized Term Breech Trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:917–27.
  6. Su M, Hannah WJ, Willan A, Ross S, Hannah ME. Planned caesarean section decreases the risk of adverse perinatal outcome due to both labour and delivery complications in the Term Breech Trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative Group. BJOG 2004;111:1065–74.
  7. Kotaska A. Inappropiate use of randomised trials to evaluate complex phenomena: case study of vaginal breech delivery [published erratum appears in BMJ 2004;329:1385]. BMJ 2004;329:1039–42.
  8. Rietberg CC, Elferink-Stinkens PM, Visser GH. The effect of the Term Breech Trial on medical intervention behaviour and neonatal outcome in The Netherlands: an analysis of 35,453 term breech infants. BJOG 2005;112:205–9.
  9. External cephalic version. Practice Bulletin No. 161. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2016;127:e54–61.
  10. Hofmeyr GJ, Kulier R, West HM. External cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD000083. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000083.pub3.
  11. Goetzinger KR, Harper LM, Tuuli MG, Macones GA, Colditz GA. Effect of regional anesthesia on the success rate of external cephalic version: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2011;118:1137–44.
  12. Alarab M, Regan C, O'Connell MP, Keane DP, O'Herlihy C, Foley ME. Singleton vaginal breech delivery at term: still a safe option. Obstet Gynecol 2004;103:407–12.
  13. Guiliani A, Scholl WM, Basver A, Tamussino KF. Mode of delivery and outcome of 699 term singleton breech deliveries at a single center. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:1694–8.
  14. Berhan Y, Haileamlak A. The risks of planned vaginal breech delivery versus planned caesarean section for term breech birth: a meta-analysis including observational studies. BJOG 2016;123:49–57.
  15. Hofmeyr GJ, Hannah M, Lawrie TA. Planned caesarean section for term breech delivery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 7. Art. No.: CD000166. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000166.pub2.
  16. Magro-Malosso ER, Saccone G, Di Tommaso M, Mele M, Berghella V. Neuraxial analgesia to increase the success rate of external cephalic version: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [published erratum appears Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:315]. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;215:276–86.

Published online on July 25, 2018.

Copyright 2018 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, posted on the Internet, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Requests for authorization to make photocopies should be directed to Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
409 12th Street, SW, PO Box 96920, Washington, DC 20090-6920

Mode of term singleton breech delivery. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 745. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2018;132:e60–3.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
409 12th Street SW, Washington, DC  20024-2188 | Mailing Address: PO Box 70620, Washington, DC 20024-9998