Trial of Labor after Cesarean (TOLAC)
Mentor: Thomas M. Gellhaus, MD
Editor: Roger Smith, MD
Options following a cesarean delivery include elective repeat cesarean delivery and trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). Successful TOLAC results in vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). No large randomized trials have yet been done to compare outcomes of TOLAC and elective repeat cesarean delivery.
A successful VBAC may decrease the potential risks associated with multiple cesarean deliveries, including placenta accreta. Benefits of elective repeat cesarean delivery include predictable timing, access for sterilization procedures, and minimization of uterine rupture risk.
Uterine rupture is a rare complication of TOLAC. Risks of uterine rupture include hysterectomy (14-33%), neonatal neurologic morbidity, and neonatal death (3-6%). If TOLAC is unsuccessful requiring an intrapartum cesarean delivery, the risks of infection and blood transfusion increase. There does not appear to be appreciable difference in risk to neonates born by TOLAC without uterine rupture and elective repeat cesarean delivery.
Characteristics of an optimal TOLAC candidate include a single prior low transverse cesarean delivery, with anticipated success rate of 60-80% and 0.5% uterine rupture risk. Other predictors of success include a history of vaginal delivery or VBAC, spontaneous onset of labor, and a non-recurring indication for the primary cesarean delivery. An unknown uterine scar performed in the setting of usual indications for a low transverse cesarean is not a contraindication to a TOLAC. Consideration should be given to gestational age, estimated fetal weight, inter-pregnancy interval and maternal demographic factors.
Absolute contraindications for TOLAC include a classical or “T” or “J” hysterotomy, a transfundal myomectomy incision, or any incision that extends through the active segment to the endometrium. The risk of uterine rupture in this setting is 4-9%. Patients with a history of uterine rupture or an obstetrical contraindication to vaginal delivery should not be offered the option for TOLAC.
There is insufficient data to know with certainty if TOLAC success or uterine rupture risk is altered with a prior low vertical hysterotomy, two or more low transverse hysterotomies, and twin gestation. While the need for induction or augmentation of labor decreases VBAC success, TOLAC may still be offered and undertaken in certain circumstances. Prostaglandins should be avoided due to the increased risk of uterine rupture, although mechanical cervical ripening (e.g. transcervical Foley catheter) may be offered to ripen an unfavorable cervix. TOLAC should be offered for a fetal demise requiring induction as there is no risk to the fetus.
Epidural analgesia does not mask signs or symptoms of uterine rupture or decrease the risk of successful TOLAC. The most common sign of uterine rupture is a change in fetal heart rate. ACOG recommends TOLAC be undertaken where immediate emergency cesarean delivery can be performed.
Options including TOLAC and elective repeat cesarean delivery should be discussed early during the course of prenatal care allowing time for consideration of resources, counseling, addressing questions, or considering changes in status. Predictors of success are available and can assist in the counseling of patients regarding their likelihood of achieving a VBAC. The final plan for delivery should be a well-documented collaborative process.
(No Authors cited), National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement – Vaginal Birth After Cesarean: New Insights March 8-10,2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:1279-95.
American College of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Practice Bulletin No. 184: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Nov;130(5):e217-e233. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002398.
Grobman WA1, Lai Y, Landon MB, et al, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU), Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Apr;109(4):806-12.
Initial Approval: January 2017; Revised July 2018
********** Notice Regarding Use ************
The Foundation for Exxcellence in Women’s Health, Inc (“Foundation”) is committed to accuracy and will review and validate all Pearls on an ongoing basis to reflect current practice.
This document is designed to aid practitioners in providing appropriate obstetric and gynecologic care. Recommendations are derived from major society guidelines and high quality evidence when available, supplemented by the opinion of the author and editorial board when necessary. It should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed.
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 Foundation reviews the articles regularly; however, its publications may not reflect the most recent evidence. While we make 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. The Foundation does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse the products or services of any firm, organization, or person. Neither the Foundation, the ABOG, SASGOG nor their respective 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.
© Copyright 2018 The Foundation for Exxcellence in Women's Health, Inc. All rights reserved. No re-print, duplication or posting allowed without prior written consent.Back to Search Results