Do you know those issues in which the studies that come out always reach contradictory conclusions? Well, the subject of babies that come from buttocks is one of them. If babies arrive at the time of delivery in that position because a cephalic version has not been made (I remember here the video of how they turn a baby from outside), professionals must decide how to attend the delivery, and we both read to Professionals explain that the safest option is to be born naturally as we read to professionals (or studies, in both cases) who say otherwise, that cesarean section is safer.
One of the most recent studies in this regard is positioned in the second option, since after comparing the data of deaths of babies coming from buttocks, they concluded that Caesarean section is the safest option in those cases. Now, the results, as always, require further reflection, and that is what we are going to do next.
Study Data
Researchers at the University of Amsterdam wanted to know which option seemed safer in breech births, which are up to 4% of all births. To reach a conclusion, they analyzed data from 58,320 women who had given birth to babies who came in podium between 1999 and 2007.
When analyzing the stories, they saw that as the years passed, the percentage of babies who had just been born by caesarean section increased, from 24% of births at the beginning to 60% at the end of the period. This increase in C-sections resulted in a decrease in mortality, since at the beginning there were 1.3 deaths per 1,000 breech births and at the end 0.7, reducing the figure almost by half. When observing the difference between the vaginal deliveries of the beginning with those of the end, the data went from 1.7 deaths per 1,000 to 1.6, being a non-significant difference.
The researchers concluded, therefore, that Caesarean section is a safer method when it comes to attending these births and they calculated that for every 338 caesarean sections a baby's life is saved.
When giving the reasons, they were unable to identify the pregnancy-related factors that increased the risk of infant death during a vaginal delivery. That is, they know that, according to the data, vaginal delivery seems more risky, but they don't know why.
But in Canada, a few years ago, they said otherwise
We talked about it at the time, and about 5 years ago. In Canada, seeing that the majority of breech births ended in a caesarean section, they decided to put measures, knowing that many mothers would choose vaginal delivery and knowing that in many cases it is a safe option. They saw that one of the obstacles that health professionals had was that they did not know how to attend childbirth in podic and began training to solve this problem.
It is logical, how will a breech birth be successful if whoever has to attend to it has never done so? It is obvious that it will end in caesarean section. The question is, could something similar happen in Holland, that lack of knowledge makes mortality rates higher than in case of caesarean section? Namely, because they are not able to say what is the reason for this and Holland is one of the countries in which, traditionally, professionals are best considered. All are assumptions.
In any case, it seems that the most logical thing in this matter is not to directly schedule C-section for breech births, but to wait for the woman to go into labor, with her contractions that warn that the baby wants to be born (it is better for the baby, since programming the caesarean section on any given day, without being in labor, you run the risk of having the baby born when you are not ready yet). And once that time comes, decide, between professionals and the mother, which obviously has a voice and vote, which option is better.
