Prognosis for deliveries in face presentation: a case–control study
To estimate the maternal and fetal prognosis for attempted vaginal deliveries of fetuses in face compared with vertex presentations. To evaluate the factors associated with a cesarean during labor for fetuses in face presentation.
This case–control study collected all the cases of face presentation in a university hospital level-3 maternity ward between 22 and 42 weeks of gestation over a 16-year period. For each case, we selected three control cases with vertex presentations delivered the same day. Cesareans before labor were excluded.
We compared 60 attempted vaginal deliveries of fetuses in face presentation with 174 of fetuses in vertex presentation. The cesarean rate during labor was more than three times higher for the face presentations (31.7 vs 9.2%, P < 0.0001). Arterial pH values and Apgar scores were similar in both sets of newborns. After logistic regression, the factors associated with a cesarean during labor were nulliparity and early diagnosis of the presentation (i.e., before 5 cm dilatation). The initial position (mentum-anterior vs. transverse or posterior) was not significantly associated with the mode of delivery.
In face presentations, attempted vaginal delivery triples the cesarean risk. Nonetheless, more than two-thirds of these women give birth vaginally without any impairment of neonatal condition.
KeywordsFace presentation Deflexed presentation Prognosis Cesarean
EA: project development, data collection, data analysis, and manuscript writing. CL: data analysis. EC: manuscript editing. PD: manuscript editing. DS: project development, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Cunningham FG, Williams JW (2010) Williams obstetrics, 23rd edn. McGraw-Hill Medical, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 6.Duff P (1981) Diagnosis and management of face presentation. Obstet Gynecol 57(1):105–112Google Scholar
- 7.Posner AC, Buch IM (1943) Face and persistent brow presentations. Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics 77:618–630Google Scholar
- 9.Chaoui A (1982) La présentation de la face. Facteurs de risques; déductions thérapeutiques. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 11:731–738Google Scholar
- 10.Benedetti TJ, Lowensohn RI, Truscott AM (1980) Face presentation at term. Obstet Gynecol 55(2):199–202Google Scholar
- 17.Audra P, Jacquot F (1988) Deflected cephalic presentation. A propos of 80 cases. Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet 83(5):355–357Google Scholar