Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prognosis for deliveries in face presentation: a case–control study

  • Maternal-Fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cunningham FG, Williams JW (2010) Williams obstetrics, 23rd edn. McGraw-Hill Medical, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cruikshank DP, Cruikshank JE (1981) Face and brow presentation: a review. Clin Obstet Gynecol 24(2):333–351

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Seeds JW, Cefalo RC (1982) Malpresentations. Clin Obstet Gynecol 25(1):145–156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Posner AC, Cohn S (1951) An analysis of 45 face presentations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 62(3):592–599

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Reinke T (1953) Face presentation: a review of 94 cases. Am J Obstet Gynecol 66(6):1185–1190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Duff P (1981) Diagnosis and management of face presentation. Obstet Gynecol 57(1):105–112

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Posner AC, Buch IM (1943) Face and persistent brow presentations. Surgery, Gynecology and Obstetrics 77:618–630

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sharmila V, Babu TA (2014) Unusual birth trauma involving face: a completely preventable iatrogenic injury. J Clin Neonatol 3(2):120–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chaoui A (1982) La présentation de la face. Facteurs de risques; déductions thérapeutiques. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 11:731–738

    Google Scholar 

  10. Benedetti TJ, Lowensohn RI, Truscott AM (1980) Face presentation at term. Obstet Gynecol 55(2):199–202

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bhal PS, Davies NJ, Chung T (1998) A population study of face and brow presentation. J Obstet Gynaecol 18(3):231–235

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Shaffer BL, Cheng YW, Vargas JE, Laros RK, Caughey AB (2006) Face presentation: predictors and delivery route. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 194(5):e10–e12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ducarme G, Ceccaldi P-F, Chesnoy V, Robinet G, Gabriel R (2006) Face presentation: retrospective study of 32 cases at term. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 34(5):393–396

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Zayed F, Amarin Z, Obeidat B, Obeidat N, Alchalabi H, Lataifeh I (2008) Face and brow presentation in northern Jordan, over a decade of experience. Arch Gynecol Obstet 278(5):427–430

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Schwartz Z, Dgani R, Lancet M, Kessler I (1986) Face presentation. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 26(3):172–176

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Arsene E, Langlois C, Garabedian C, Clouqueur E, Deruelle P, Subtil D (2016) Prenatal factors related to face presentation: a case control study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 294(2):279–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Audra P, Jacquot F (1988) Deflected cephalic presentation. A propos of 80 cases. Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet 83(5):355–357

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pôle Femme Mère Enfant, Centre Hospitalier de Calais, Boulevard des Justes, 62100, Calais, France

    Emmanuelle Arsène

  2. Unité de Biostatistiques, MRRC, CHRU Lille, 6, rue du Professeur Laguesse, 59045, Lille cedex, France

    C. Langlois

  3. Pôle Femme Mère Nouveau-né, Clinique d’Obstétrique, Hôpital Jeanne de Flandre, Université Nord de France, 59037, Lille cedex, France

    E. Clouqueur, P. Deruelle & D. Subtil

  4. EA 4489, Environnement périnatal et croissance, PRES Université Lille Nord de France, 59000, Lille, France

    P. Deruelle

  5. EA 2694, PRES Université Lille Nord de France, 59000, Lille, France

    D. Subtil

Authors
  1. Emmanuelle Arsène
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Langlois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Clouqueur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Deruelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. Subtil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

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.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuelle Arsène.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arsène, E., Langlois, C., Clouqueur, E. et al. Prognosis for deliveries in face presentation: a case–control study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 300, 869–874 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-019-05241-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-019-05241-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation