Prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean deliveries using machine learning

被引:62
作者
Lipschuetz, Michal [1 ,2 ]
Guedalia, Joshua [1 ]
Rottenstreich, Amihai [2 ]
Persky, Michal Novoselsky [2 ]
Cohen, Sarah M. [2 ]
Kabiri, Doron [2 ]
Levin, Gabriel [2 ]
Yagel, Simcha [2 ]
Unger, Ron [1 ]
Sompolinsky, Yishai [2 ]
机构
[1] Bar Ilan Univ, Mina & Everard Goodman Fac Life Sci, Ramat Gan, Israel
[2] Hadassah Hebrew Univ, Med Ctr, Obstet & Gynecol Div, Jerusalem, Israel
关键词
machine-learning; personalized; prediction; trial of labor; vaginal birth after cesarean delivery; VALIDATION; MODEL; TRIAL; RATES; WOMEN; LABOR;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2019.12.267
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Efforts to reduce cesarean delivery rates to 12-15% have been undertaken worldwide. Special focus has been directed towards parturients who undergo a trial of labor after cesarean delivery to reduce the burden of repeated cesarean deliveries. Complication rates are lowest when a vaginal birth is achieved and highest when an unplanned cesarean delivery is performed, which emphasizes the need to assess, in advance, the likelihood of a successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery calculators have been developed in different populations; however, some limitations to their implementation into clinical practice have been described. Machine learning methods enable investigation of large-scale datasets with input combinations that traditional statistical analysis tools have difficulty processing. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using machine-learning methods to predict a successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: The electronic medical records of singleton, term labors during a 12-year period in a tertiary referral center were analyzed. With the use of gradient boosting, models that incorporated multiple maternal and fetal features were created to predict successful vaginal birth in parturients who undergo a trial of labor after cesarean delivery. One model was created to provide a personalized risk score for vaginal birth after cesarean delivery with the use of features that are available as early as the first antenatal visit; a second model was created that reassesses this score after features are added that are available only in proximity to delivery. RESULTS: A cohort of 9888 parturients with 1 previous cesarean delivery was identified, of which 75.6% of parturients (n=7473) attempted a trial of labor, with a success rate of 88%. A machinelearning based model to predict when vaginal delivery would be successful was developed. When features that are available at the first antenatal visit are used, the model showed a receiver operating characteristic curve with area under the curve of 0.745 (95% confidence interval, 0.728-0.762) that increased to 0.793 (95% confidence interval, 0.778-0.808) when features that are available in proximity to the delivery process were added. Additionally, for the later model, a risk stratification tool was built to allocate parturients into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups for failed trial of labor after cesarean delivery. The low- and medium-risk groups (42.4% and 25.6% of parturients, respectively) showed a success rate of 97.3% and 90.9%, respectively. The high-risk group (32.1%) had a vaginal delivery success rate of 73.3%. Application of the model to a cohort of parturients who elected a repeat cesarean delivery (n=2145) demonstrated that 31% of these parturients would have been allocated to the low- and medium-risk groups had a trial of labor been attempted. CONCLUSION: Trial of labor after cesarean delivery is safe for most parturients. Success rates are high, even in a population with high rates of trial of labor after cesarean delivery. Application of a machine-learning algorithm to assign a personalized risk score for a successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery may help in decision-making and contribute to a reduction in cesarean delivery rates. Parturient allocation to risk groups may help delivery process management.
引用
收藏
页码:613.e1 / 613.e12
页数:12
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] A modified prediction model for VBAC, in a European population
    Annessi, Eleonora
    Del Giovane, Cinzia
    Magnani, Laura
    Carossino, Emanuela
    Baldoni, Giulia
    Battagliarin, Giuseppe
    Accorsi, Paolo
    Fabio, Facchinetti
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2016, 29 (03) : 435 - 439
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2019, Obstet Gynecol, V133, pe110, DOI 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003078
  • [3] Stemming the global caesarean section epidemic
    不详
    [J]. LANCET, 2018, 392 (10155) : 1279 - 1279
  • [4] Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics, 2017, Obstet Gynecol, V130, pe168, DOI [10.1097/AOG.0000000000002398, 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002351]
  • [5] Batista GEAPA, 2003, APPL ARTIF INTELL, V17, P519, DOI [10.1080/713827181, 10.1080/08839510390219309]
  • [6] Impact of timing of delivery on maternal and neonatal outcomes for women after three previous caesarean deliveries; a secondary analysis of the caesarean section registry
    Breslin, N.
    Vander Haar, E.
    Friedman, A. M.
    Duffy, C.
    Gyamfi-Bannerman, C.
    [J]. BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2019, 126 (08) : 1008 - 1013
  • [7] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, BIRTHS METH DEL
  • [8] Validation of a Prediction Model for Vaginal Birth After Caesarean
    Chaillet, Nils
    Bujold, Emmanuel
    Dube, Eric
    Grobman, William A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY CANADA, 2013, 35 (02) : 119 - 124
  • [9] "Doing something" about the cesarean delivery rate
    Clark, Steven L.
    Garite, Thomas J.
    Hamilton, Emily F.
    Belfort, Michael A.
    Hankins, G. D.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2018, 219 (03) : 267 - 271
  • [10] Does Information Available at Delivery Improve the Accuracy of Predicting Vaginal Birth after Cesarean? Validation of the Published Models in an Independent Patient Cohort
    Costantine, Maged M.
    Fox, Karin A.
    Pacheco, Luis Diego
    Mateus, Julio
    Hankins, Gary D. V.
    Grobman, William A.
    Saade, George R.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2011, 28 (04) : 293 - 298