what are the chances of having a c-section after a vaginal delivery?

[basil]

Why can't I find this information? It must be known somewhere/someplace. If the total rate is ~30% then the rate after successful vaginal delivery must be substantially lower, right?

My first labor was about 12 hours from arrival at the hospital (2 or 3 cm) to delivery, pitocin augmented, with about 1 hour of pushing. DS was 7 lbs, 10 oz, I was 40w3d. So all in all went pretty smoothly. This baby is head down at 36 weeks and I am 1 cm dilated so far.

Just wondering what my chances are of having a complication this time, vs things all being ok like last time.

[swissair81]

Roughly 60-80%. I did an entire grad level paper on this last semester. I can give you source material if you want.

[mikala]

Roughly 60-80%. I did an entire grad level paper on this last semester. I can give you source material if you want.

Wouldn't this be the rate of vaginal delivery for subsequent deliveries instead of the rate of c-section for subsequent birth?

Going from a very unscientific poll of my friends and family (maybe 40 moms?) everyone who had their first child vaginally was able to deliver subsequent children the same way. There are obviously exceptions to this in larger data sets and every pregnancy is different but I'm guessing op is correct about the rate bring lower than 30‰.

[georgiegirl]

I'm guessing you should be able to have another vaginal delivery no problem. I think Obs are much more relaxed if you have a "proven pelvis." Your first birth sounds totally average. I'm guessing this time around will be quicker and easier. I know a few moms who c-sections the second time around because (1) baby was breech or (2) they were induced early for some reason, like preeclampsia, and their body wasn't ready to deliver.

[swissair81]

Wouldn't this be the rate of vaginal delivery for subsequent deliveries instead of the rate of c-section for subsequent birth?

Going from a very unscientific poll of my friends and family (maybe 40 moms?) everyone who had their first child vaginally was able to deliver subsequent children the same way. There are obviously exceptions to this in larger data sets and every pregnancy is different but I'm guessing op is correct about the rate bring lower than 30‰.

Yes sorry. DS had a sleep study last night and clearly I am tired enough for you to need to point out the obvious.

[basil]

Thanks! Yeah, I keep finding data about rates of VBAC but not "CAVB"!!

[AnnieW625]

Totally late to this thread, but you could have placenta previa with any pregnancy and need a c section even after a vaginal birth. I had it with DD1 until she was around 32 weeks so I delivered vaginally, but I didn't have it DD2.

[klwa]

Anecdotal at best, but several friends/family have had C's after their first was born V. However, by far more have had V births if they had a V birth with their first child.

[sunnyside]

http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378%2811%2901968-5/fulltext

[llama8]

I would think that it depends on the pregnancy. You could have no complications the first time and have something arise in the second pregnancy. For example, the baby could be breech. I would think it would be so dependent on an individual situation. Most likely a healthy vaginal delivery with #1 would be more likely with #2, barring specific issues, because the body has proven that it could deliver vaginally.

[Katigre]

Based on that study it was just 3% who had a csection.

[mom2khj]

I would think it would be the same for the first? Each pregnancy would have the same odds of having a C, if you'd never had one? What do I know though, LOL.

I had 2 v's and then a c.

[Katigre]

I would think it would be the same for the first? Each pregnancy would have the same odds of having a C, if you'd never had one? What do I know though, LOL.

I had 2 v's and then a c.
No, your chances of a csection are MUCH higher with a first delivery than with subsequent deliveries (assuming your first delivery was vaginal).

[mom2khj]

No, your chances of a csection are MUCH higher with a first delivery than with subsequent deliveries (assuming your first delivery was vaginal).

Why is that? Truly curious!

[basil]

Ha, funny this has revived! I'm the OP, and my DD is 10 weeks old now. At 40w1d, my water broke at 6 am, we went right in since I was GBS+, and she was born at 2 pm after only 9 minutes of pushing :)

[georgiegirl]

Ha, funny this has revived! I'm the OP, and my DD is 10 weeks old now. At 40w1d, my water broke at 6 am, we went right in since I was GBS+, and she was born at 2 pm after only 9 minutes of pushing :)

Glad it worked out well!

[egoldber]

Why is that? Truly curious!

The c-section rate for first deliveries is 25-40% depending on the OB and hospital. Many OBs and hospitals are unwilling to let labor extend longer than certain timeframes, especially if your water has broken.

But once a mom has delivered vaginally, then OBs are typically more comfortable letting labor proceed at it's own pace. Also, subsequent deliveries tend to be much shorter and within the allowed timeframes.

[mom2khj]

Makes sense! TFS!

[Katigre]

The c-section rate for first deliveries is 25-40% depending on the OB and hospital. Many OBs and hospitals are unwilling to let labor extend longer than certain timeframes, especially if your water has broken.

But once a mom has delivered vaginally, then OBs are typically more comfortable letting labor proceed at it's own pace. Also, subsequent deliveries tend to be much shorter and within the allowed timeframes.
Yes to all of this. Csection for 'failure to progress' is much more common in first time moms who have longer labors (my first labor was 52 hours, for example, and many providers would have recommended augmentation and/or csection due to that although I was able to have a vaginal birth - but my subsequent three labors were all under 20 hours though). Also, induction is far more likely to result in a csection for first time moms than moms who have already given birth (most common reasons for csection after an induction are from fetal distress due to the effects of the induction (ex. pitocin contractions not tolerated well by the baby) or from failure to progress which can be due to baby's position, baby not ready to be born yet, etc...)

Second time moms have much more successful inductions so those don't necessarily raise their csection risk, and their chance of having a longer labor than average are far less likely as well.

[Myira]

Ha, funny this has revived! I'm the OP, and my DD is 10 weeks old now. At 40w1d, my water broke at 6 am, we went right in since I was GBS+, and she was born at 2 pm after only 9 minutes of pushing :)

Congrats! I am always in awe when I hear that it took someone only minutes of pushing! I really didn't push since the first time I had taken an epi and second time was ready to push 10 cm dilated when my OB declared that the baby was face presentation and we decided to go for a c-section.