Table 1.
Summary of included studies
| Publication year | median 2003 (range 1984–2017) |
| Country | N (%) |
| France, Germany, Hong Kong, Kazakhstan, Morocco, Mozambique, Oman, Poland, Saudi Arabia | 1, each (31%) |
| India, UK | 2, each (14%) |
| Israel | 3 (10%) |
| US | 13 (45%) |
| Funding | N (%) |
| Non-industry funded | 4 (14%) |
| Industry-funded | 1 (3%) |
| No funding | 2 (7%) |
| NR | 22 (76%) |
| Study design | N (%) |
| RCT | 6 (21%) |
| Cohort, prospective | 12 (41%) |
| Cohort, retrospective | 11 (38%) |
| Study sample size | Median 237 (range 32–12,676) |
| Maternal agea | Range 17-45y |
| Proportion of women with any prior vaginal deliveryb | Range 12–64% |
| Interventions - pharmacologic | N (%) |
| Pharmacologic (all) | 19 (66%) |
| PGE2 vs. no PGE2 | 1 (3%) |
| PGE1 vs. spontaneous labor | 2 (6%) |
| PGE2 vs. spontaneous labor | 3 (10%) |
| PGE2 vs. expectant management | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin vs. no oxytocin | 2 (7%) |
| Oxytocin (AUG) vs. expectant management | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin vs. PGE2 | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin vs. PGE2 vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin (IND) vs. oxytocin (AUG) vs. no oxytocin | 3 (10%) |
| Oxytocin vs. (PGE1 + oxytocin [AUG]) vs. (PGE2 + oxytocin [AUG]) vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin vs. prostanglandin (NS) vs. (oxytocin+prostaglandin [NS]) vs. amniotomy vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Mifepristone +/− prostaglandin (NS) +/− (amniotomy+oxytocin+epidural) vs. placebo | 1 (3%) |
| Epidural analgesia vs. no epidural analgesia | 1 (3%) |
| Interventions – non-pharmacologic | N (%) |
| Non-pharmacologic (all) | 3 (10%) |
| Membrane sweep vs. spontaneous labor/no intervention | 2 (6%) |
| Foley catheter 30 mL vs. Foley catheter 80 mL | 1 (3%) |
| Interventions – pharmacologic +/−non-pharmacologic | N (%) |
| Pharmacologic +/− non-pharmacologic (all) | 7 (24%) |
| Oxytocin vs. (PGE1 +/− amniotomy [IND/AUG]) vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Foley catheter vs. oxytocin vs. (Foley+oxytocin) vs. PGE2 vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Foley catheter +/− oxytocin +/− PGE2 +/− amniotomy vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin +/− PGE1 +/− Foley catheter vs. expectant management | 1 (3%) |
| PGE2 vs. PGE2 + balloon catheter | 1 (3%) |
| Oxytocin vs. Cook balloon + oxytocin | 1 (3%) |
| Amniotomy vs. oxytocin vs. PGE1 vs. spontaneous labor | 1 (3%) |
| Outcomes | N (%) |
| Studies reporting spontaneous onset of labor in addition to VBAC | 4 (14%) |
| Studies reporting assisted vaginal delivery | 8 (28%) |
| Studies reporting uterine dehiscencec only | 4 (14%) |
| Studies reporting uterine dehiscencec and uterine rupture | 13 (45%) |
| Studies reporting uterine rupture | 22 (76%) |
NR not reported, NS not specified, PGE1 prostaglandin E1 (e.g., misoprostol), PGE2 prostaglandin E2 (e.g., dinoprostone gel, dinoprostone inserts), RCT randomized controlled trial, UK United Kingdom, US United States, vs versus, y year(s)
a based on studies that provided data on maternal age (n = 21)
b based on studies that provided data on prior vaginal delivery (proportion of women in each study arm, n = 8)
c uterine dehiscence reported heterogeneously among studies, also includes: asymptomatic dehiscence, threatening uterine rupture, incomplete rupture/dehiscence, uterine scar disruption, uterine scar separation, uterine scar dehiscence, scar dehiscence