# Neonatal Outcome following External Cephalic Version (ECV)—Comparison between Vaginal Birth after Successful ECV and Elective Caesarean Section after Unsuccessful ECV

**Authors:** Felix Borgmeier, Sophia Horst de Cuestas, Maximilian Pruss, Noa Fath, Carsten Hagenbeck

PMC · DOI: 10.3390/jcm13133837 · Journal of Clinical Medicine · 2024-06-29

## TL;DR

This study compares the outcomes of vaginal births after a successful external cephalic version (ECV) to elective caesarean sections, finding that both result in similar neonatal health outcomes.

## Contribution

The study provides evidence supporting the non-inferiority of vaginal birth after successful ECV compared to elective caesarean section in terms of neonatal outcomes.

## Key findings

- Vaginal births after successful ECV had similar NICU admission rates compared to elective caesarean sections.
- APGAR scores were comparable between the two groups, with slightly more neonates in the caesarean group scoring below the median.
- Arterial pH was significantly lower in neonates born vaginally after ECV compared to those born via caesarean section.

## Abstract

Introduction: In 3–6% of pregnancies, foetuses can be expected to be in a breech presentation near term. Consultation concerning further management of the pregnancy, including the option of an external cephalic version (ECV), is recommended by international guidelines (RCOG, ACOG, and DGGG). With regards to an ECV, there need to be two assumptions. Firstly, the procedure is safe, which has been shown adequately. Secondly, a vaginal birth after a successful ECV needs to prove to be non-inferior to the alternative of an elective caesarean section. The aim of this study is to assess the non-inferiority assumption. Methods: Overall, 142 singleton pregnancies were analysed that presented a foetus in a non-cephalic presentation and underwent an ECV near term between 2011 and 2020. The ECV was performed at 36 weeks of gestation for primiparous women and at 37/38 weeks of gestation for multiparous women. To assess neonatal outcome, the following parameters were recorded: arterial and venous umbilical cord blood pH, APGAR scores and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Data were analysed under the assumption that neonatal outcome does not differ between elective caesarean sections with or without an ECV in advance. Results: The success rate of an ECV was 56.3% (80/142). In the case of a successful ECV, there was a 77.5% (62/80) chance for a vaginal delivery. The mean arterial pH for neonates born vaginally after successful ECV was 7.262 (SD 0.089), compared to 7.316 (SD 0.051) for those born via elective caesarean section (p < 0.001). APGAR scores at 1, 5, and 10 min were similar between the groups, with a slightly higher proportion of neonates scoring below the median in the caesarean section group. Specifically, 13.7% (7/51) at 1 min, 15.7% (8/51) at 5 min, and 9.8% (5/51) at 10 min in the caesarean section group were below the median, compared to 4.92% (3/61), 4.92% (3/61), and 3.28% (2/61) in the vaginal birth group. NICU admission rates were 3.28% for vaginal births and 3.92% for elective caesarean sections (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Women with a successful ECV can expect a neonatal birth outcome after a vaginal birth that is non-inferior to an alternative elective caesarean section.

## Full-text entities

- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11242735/full.md

## Figures

4 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11242735/full.md

## References

17 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11242735/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC11242735