SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
Maternal and infant outcomes of planned mode of delivery in twin pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Maternal and infant outcomes of planned mode of delivery in twin pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the effect of two different training interventions on improving vaginal twin birth rates and provider confidence and knowledge levels: A pre- and post-intervention study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe optimal mode of delivery for twins has been debated for decades. The objective of this study is to compare maternal and perinatal outcomes between planned cesarean birth and planned vaginal delivery in twin pregnancies. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe conducted searches across MedLine, CINAHL, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, from database inception to June 13, 2025, for studies that compared planned vaginal delivery with planned cesarean birth regarding maternal and/or neonatal outcomes in twin gestations. Random-effects models were used to estimate pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and heterogeneity was assessed using the I
resultsAmong 11 207 publications, 33 studies met the inclusion criteria. Planned cesarean versus vaginal delivery showed no significant differences in neonatal death (OR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.58-1.67), Apgar score <7 at 5 min (OR 0.74, 95% CI: 0.51-1.08), low umbilical artery pH (OR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.30-1.06), or maternal death (OR 0.68, 95% CI: 0.11-4.31). The analysis of composite adverse outcomes (16 studies) showed a slight advantage for planned cesarean (OR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94-0.99). Planned vaginal delivery showed lower rates of periventricular leukomalacia (OR 3.14, 95% CI: 1.45-6.83) and maternal wound complications (OR 1.86, 95% CI: 1.25-2.76).
conclusionsPlanned cesarean delivery in twin pregnancies shows a small trend toward improved neonatal outcomes but is associated with higher maternal wound complications. Mortality and most individual outcomes were similar between groups. Individualized decisions should guide the choice of delivery mode.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.