Obstetric management for stillbirth complicated by a prior cesarean delivery: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Jacqueline M. Powell, Alyssa R. Hersh, Karen S. Greiner, Zoe C. Frank, Rachel A. Pilliod, Aaron B. Caughey

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: The primary concern for a trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) is a uterine rupture leading to neonatal injury or mortality and maternal mortality. In individuals who have a term stillbirth, the neonatal concern is absent, yet repeat cesarean delivery remains common in this setting. Given the increased maternal risks from cesarean, it is important to evaluate obstetric management options in the population of women who have a term stillbirth and prior cesarean delivery (CD). Objectives: To examine the outcomes and costs of a TOLAC via induction of labor verses a repeat CD for cases of stillbirth occurring near term. Study design: A decision-analytic model incorporating the current and a subsequent delivery using TreeAge software was designed to compare outcomes in women induced for a TOLAC to those undergoing repeat CD in the setting of stillbirth at 34–41 weeks’ gestation. We used a theoretical cohort of 6000 women, the estimated annual number of women a prior cesarean who experience a stillbirth in the United States. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for both modes of delivery with consideration of future pregnancy risks. Future pregnancy risks included uterine rupture, hysterectomy, placenta accreta, maternal death, neonatal death, and neonatal neurological deficits. Probabilities were derived from the literature, and a cost-effectiveness threshold was set at $100,000/QALY. Results: In our theoretical cohort of 6000 women with a prior CD and current stillbirth, induction of labor resulted in 4836 fewer cesarean deliveries during stillbirth management, 1040 fewer cesarean deliveries in the subsequent pregnancy, and 14 fewer cases of placenta accreta in the subsequent pregnancy, despite 29 additional uterine ruptures across both pregnancies. Induction of labor was found to be the dominant strategy, resulting in decreased costs and increased QALYs. Univariate sensitivity analyses demonstrated that induction of labor was cost effective until the risk of uterine rupture in the first delivery exceeded 0.83% (baseline estimate: 0.38%). Additional univariate sensitivity analyses found that induction of labor was cost effective until the risk of IOL failure in the first delivery exceeded 64% (baseline estimate: 19%). Conclusion: In our theoretical cohort, induction of labor for TOLAC in the setting of a stillbirth with a history of prior CD is cost effective compared to a repeat CD. The results of this analysis demonstrate the benefit of induction of labor among women in this scenario who desire a future pregnancy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2020

Keywords

  • Cesarean delivery
  • cost-effectiveness analysis
  • induction of labor
  • stillbirth
  • trial of labor after cesarean
  • uterine rupture

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Obstetric management for stillbirth complicated by a prior cesarean delivery: a cost-effectiveness analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this