Delivery of the second twin: comparison of two approaches.

Objective: To compare two obstetrical approaches toward delivery of the second twin: one of expectant management, and the other, active; to compare the neonatal and maternal results and thereby identify, if possible, the optimal approach.

Study Design: This retrospective study looked at twin births in two maternity units in the Paris, France metropolitan region: Antoine Béclère (AB) in Clamart, and Port-Royal (PR) in Paris and concerned 113 deliveries of pairs of twins at AB and 78 at PR.

Results: The mean duration of the interbirth interval was 9 min at AB and 5 min at PR (P < 0.001). The characteristics of the pregnancies and the deliveries of twin A were comparable. Spontaneous birth accounted for 51% of twin A births at AB and 27% at PR (P < 0.001). Intrauterine manipulation of twin B occurred in 2% of the births at AB and 43% at PR (P < 0.001). At AB, there were five cesareans to deliver the second twin, but none at PR. The Apgar scores at AB and PR were identical, at 1 and 5 min, and for births before 32 weeks' gestation as well as for those afterwards. At AB, 19% (n = 21) of second twins were transferred to the neonatal intensive care unit, and at PR, 18% (n = 14).

Conclusion: The neonatal results were similar in both groups, even though both the rate of obstetric maneuvers and the interbirth interval differed significantly. The two methods therefore appear to be equivalent when judged by the second twin's neonatal indicators. Our data suggest that an active approach diminishes the likelihood of cesarean delivery for the second twin, without increasing the neonatal risk.