Vaginal delivery after prolonged second stage for nulliparous women with epidural was 79.9% compared with 97.9% for women delivering within guidelines (P<.001) and without epidural 87.0% compared with 99.4% for prolonged compared with within guidelines (P<.001), which remained significant after adjustment (Fig. 1A). Rates of operative vaginal delivery for women who delivered after a prolonged second stage were at least twofold higher for nulliparous women (with an epidural, prolonged second stage compared with within guidelines 23.0% compared with 12.2%, P<.001; adjusted OR 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.04–2.45) and without epidural prolonged second stage compared with within guidelines 16.0% compared with 6.2% (P<.001; adjusted OR 2.89, 95% CI 2.30–3.63) (Fig. 1B). Cesarean deliveries in the second stage for women after a prolonged second stage were more likely to be performed for indications of dystocia or cephalopelvic disproportion instead of nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing (Table 3).
Composite maternal morbidity was higher for nulliparous women with an epidural who delivered after a prolonged second stage (8.4% compared with 6.1%, P<.001; adjusted OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.25–1.62) (Fig. 1C). Specific morbidities were increased for nulliparous women who delivered after a prolonged second stage with an approximately threefold higher rate of chorioamnionitis as well as increased odds of episiotomy, third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration, and a 1-day longer median hospital stay (Table 3). Nulliparous women with an epidural who delivered after a prolonged second stage had additional increased rates of endometritis (1.2% compared with 0.4%, P<.001; adjusted OR 3.21, 95% CI 2.25–4.57), wound separation (0.2% compared with 0.02%, P<.001; adjusted OR 12.13, 95% CI 3.63–40.46), and postpartum hemorrhage (5.9% compared with 3.7%, P<.001; adjusted OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.27–1.78), but a lower rate of maternal intensive care unit admission (0.2% compared with 0.5%, P=.048) that did not remain significant after adjustment (adjusted OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.20–1.21) (Table 2). Nulliparous women without an epidural who delivered with a prolonged second stage had a higher rate of postpartum hemorrhage (5.1% compared with 3.9%, P=.04) that did not remain significant after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.87–1.80) (Table 3).
In multiparous women with a prolonged second stage compared with women who delivered within guidelines, vaginal delivery occurred in 88.7% compared with 99.7% (P<.001) of women with an epidural and 96.2% compared with 99.9% (P<.001) of multiparous women without an epidural, which remained significant after adjustment (Fig. 1A). Rates of operative vaginal delivery for women who delivered after a prolonged second stage were at least threefold higher (with an epidural, prolonged second stage compared with within guidelines 9.5% compared with 3.8%, P<.001; adjusted OR 3.26, 95% CI 2.66–3.99, and without epidural, prolonged second stage compared with within guidelines 4.6% compared with 1.4%, P<.001; adjusted OR 3.20,(95% CI 2.12–4.83) (Fig. 1B).
Composite maternal morbidity rates were not higher for multiparous women with a prolonged second stage overall, but there was an increased odds for multiparous women with an epidural after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.17–1.97) (Fig. 1C). Multiparous women who delivered with a prolonged second stage regardless of epidural status had higher rates of chorioamnionitis and higher odds of postpartum hemorrhage and third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration after adjustment.
Overall, composite neonatal morbidity rates for deliveries with prolonged second stage were 11% for nulliparous women and 9% for multiparous women, which were approximately 2–3% higher absolute rates compared with deliveries within guidelines (Fig. 1D). Neonates born after a prolonged second stage were also 1.35- to 1.85-fold more likely to be admitted to the NICU (Tables 3 and 4). Rates of neonatal sepsis were approximately double for nulliparous women with a prolonged second stage regardless of epidural. Additionally, for deliveries with a prolonged second stage, neonates had an approximately 2.5-fold increased odds of 5-minute Apgar score less than 4 for nulliparous women and multiparous women with an epidural (Tables 3 and 4). In multiparous women without an epidural, shoulder dystocia was higher (2.2% compared with 1.7%, adjusted OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.02–3.09). The rates of intracranial hemorrhage or periventricular hemorrhage were increased for nulliparous women who delivered after a prolonged second stage without an epidural (0.3% compared with 0.1%, P=.044; OR 4.67, 95% CI 1.04–20.90), although the outcome was too rare for an adjusted analysis. Asphyxia rates were increased for nulliparous women who delivered after prolonged second stage with an epidural (0.3% compared with 0.1%, P=.024; adjusted OR 2.39, 95% CI 1.22–4.66). Asphyxia rates were not different for multiparous women who delivered outside the guidelines, regardless of epidural status.
Perinatal mortality was a rare outcome and for deliveries with an epidural was not different for women after s prolonged second stage for either parity. For deliveries without an epidural, perinatal mortality was increased for women after s prolonged second stage in both nulliparous women (0.18% compared with 0.04%, adjusted OR 5.92, 95% CI 1.43–24.51) and multiparous women (0.21% compared with 0.03%, adjusted OR 6.34, 95% CI 1.32–30.34).
In an analysis limited to nulliparous women with an epidural with a nonoperative vaginal delivery, for women who delivered with a prolonged second stage, we observed results in the same direction, although not all associations remained significant in this subset of women (maternal composite outcome adjusted OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.99–1.46; endometritis adjusted OR 2.30, 95% CI 1.27–4.15; postpartum hemorrhage adjusted OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.15–1.83; chorioamnionitis adjusted OR 2.63, 95% CI 2.19–3.15; third- or fourth-degree laceration adjusted OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.64–2.37 as well as neonatal composite outcome adjusted OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.17–1.65; shoulder dystocia adjusted OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.17–1.65; 5-minute Apgar score less than 4 adjusted OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.07–6.17; NICU admission adjusted OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.02–1.53; and neonatal sepsis adjusted OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.39–2.91). These results suggest that increased morbidity with a prolonged second stage was not fully explained by the mode of delivery.
In this large, U.S. multicenter cohort study, we found that maternal morbidity was increased for deliveries with a prolonged second stage. Given the large sample size in our study with detailed clinical data, we were also able to demonstrate an increased risk in neonatal morbidity in all deliveries, most concerning for a 0.2% absolute increased risk of neonatal asphyxia in nulliparous women with an epidural and an increase risk in perinatal mortality of 0.14% for nulliparous woman and 0.18% for multiparous women in deliveries without an epidural.
The vaginal delivery rates that we observed in deliveries for prolonged second stage duration were similar to previously reported success rates from single institutions of 83%9 and 93%11 of nulliparous women delivered vaginally within 3 hours and 90%16 of multiparous women delivered vaginally within 1–2 hours, although were not directly comparable because those studies did not stratify by epidural status. Our vaginal delivery rates were also similar to a secondary analysis of a clinical trial of fetal pulse oximetry trial in which 88% of nulliparous women delivered within 3 hours, regardless of epidural status.12
Increased maternal morbidities were generally consistent with reports from previous studies including postpartum hemorrhage, maternal febrile morbidity or infection, and perineal trauma.4–10 It was reassuring that we did not observe significantly increased risks for other serious maternal complications including need for blood transfusion, cesarean hysterectomy, or intensive care unit admission. Specific neonatal risks associated with a prolonged second stage, similar to previously reported, included an increased risk of 5-minute Apgar score less than 4 (except nulliparous women without an epidural; note Apgar score less than 7 in the literature) and NICU admission.9–12 In contrast to studies that found no differences in neonatal outcomes including more serious complications such as seizures or sepsis,4–8 we observed a doubling of the rates of neonatal sepsis (except in multiparous women without an epidural). Novel findings included an increased risk of neonatal asphyxia for second stage of labor that exceeded College guidelines in nulliparous women and a sixfold increase in perinatal mortality for deliveries without an epidural although overall absolute rates for both outcomes were low (less than 0.5%).
The mechanism for increased morbidity cannot necessarily be attributed to the duration of second stage, because the underlying reasons for longer duration may also contribute to morbidity. For example, chorioamnionitis and increased fetal size are associated with both longer labor duration and increased maternal and neonatal morbidity.17–19 Complications may also have been partly the result of the increase in operative vaginal delivery, but our findings in a sensitivity analysis that morbidity was increased even among nulliparous women with a nonoperative delivery indicates that prolonged duration of second stage may be an independent risk for morbidity.15 The reason that perinatal mortality was increased only in deliveries without an epidural is also unknown, but perhaps a prolonged second stage attributed to epidural use is associated with less risk than a prolonged second stage resulting from other pathways.
Our study was limited by lack of data on delayed compared with active pushing, which has been shown to have a mean increase of 57 minutes in the second stage in a meta-analysis; however, delayed pushing has been associated with increased maternal febrile morbidity and decreased umbilical cord pH in some studies indicating that duration itself may be important.20 A randomized controlled trial of delayed compared with active pushing would be useful to study the effect of duration of second stage on maternal and neonatal outcomes. There is also the possibility that some of our findings were false-positives given the large number of comparisons. Caution is also warranted given the retrospective data and lack of information on long-term maternal outcomes including incontinence and childhood neurologic impairment. Nonetheless, the major strength of our study was the large numbers from multiple institutions across the United States with rich patient-level data allowing us to investigate rare neonatal morbidities at term.
We found that a prolonged second stage was associated with highly successful vaginal delivery rates but with small increases in maternal and serious neonatal morbidity as well as perinatal mortality in deliveries without an epidural. However, it was reassuring that for mothers with an epidural who comprised the large majority of our cohort, there was no increased risk of perinatal death or hypoxic–ischemic encephalopathy in association with a prolonged second stage. Benefits of vaginal delivery need to be weighed against increased maternal and neonatal risks when considering duration of second stage outside College guidelines.
1. Hellman LM, Prystowsky H. The duration of the second stage of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1952;63:1223–33.
2. Hamilton G. On mortality from the use of forceps. Br Foreign Med Chir Rev 1853;11:511.
3. Hamilton G. On the proper management of tedious labors. Br Foreign Med Chir Rev 1871;48:449.
4. Cohen WR. Influence of the duration of second stage labor on perinatal outcome and puerperal morbidity. Obstet Gynecol 1977;49:266–9.
5. Moon JM, Smith CV, Rayburn WF. Perinatal outcome after a prolonged second stage of labor. J Reprod Med 1990;35:229–31.
6. Saunders NS, Paterson CM, Wadsworth J. Neonatal and maternal morbidity in relation to the length of the second stage of labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;99:381–5.
7. Menticoglou SM, Manning F, Harman C, Morrison I. Perinatal outcome in relation to second-stage duration. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;173:906–12.
8. Myles TD, Santolaya J. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in patients with a prolonged second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:52–8.
9. Cheng YW, Hopkins LM, Caughey AB. How long is too long: Does a prolonged second stage of labor in nulliparous women affect maternal and neonatal outcomes? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:933–8.
10. Allen VM, Baskett TF, O'Connell CM, McKeen D, Allen AC. Maternal and perinatal outcomes with increasing duration of the second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2009;113:1248–58.
11. Cheng YW, Hopkins LM, Laros RK Jr, Caughey AB. Duration of the second stage of labor in multiparous women: maternal and neonatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007;196:585.e1–6.
12. Rouse DJ, Weiner SJ, Bloom SL, Varner MW, Spong CY, Ramin SM, et al.. Second-stage labor duration in nulliparous women: relationship to maternal and perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;201:357.e1–7.
13. Laughon SK, Branch DW, Beaver J, Zhang J. Changes in labor patterns over 50 years. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:419.e1–9.
14. Zhang J, Troendle J, Reddy UM, Laughon SK, Branch DW, Burkman R, et al.. Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:326.e1–326.e10.
15. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Operative vaginal delivery. ACOG Practice Bulletin 17. Washington, DC: ACOG; 2000.
16. Bleich AT, Alexander JM, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. An analysis of second-stage labor beyond 3 hours in nulliparous women. Am J Perinatol 2012;29:717–22.
17. Duff P, Sanders R, Gibbs RS. The course of labor in term patients with chorioamnionitis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;147:391–5.
18. Piper JM, Bolling DR, Newton ER. The second stage of labor: factors influencing duration. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991;165:976–9.
19. Yoder PR, Gibbs RS, Blanco JD, Castaneda YS, St Clair PJ. A prospective, controlled study of maternal and perinatal outcome after intra-amniotic infection at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;145:695–701.
20. Tuuli MG, Frey HA, Odibo AO, Macones GA, Cahill AG. Immediate compared with delayed pushing in the second stage of labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 2012;120:660–8.
Supplemental Digital Content
© 2014 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.