RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence suggests that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks' gestation may lead to more favorable perinatal outcomes than expectant management, however, how to weigh the pros and cons of elective labor induction at 39 weeks, the expectation of spontaneous delivery at 40 or 41 weeks, or delayed labor induction at 40 or 41 weeks on neonatal and maternal outcomes remains a practical challenge in clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVE: We compared the neonatal and maternal outcomes between elective induction of labor at 39 weeks' gestation and expectant management in a real-world setting. We also divided the expectantly managed group and compared outcomes of the spontaneous delivery at 40 or 41 weeks' gestation group and the induced group at 40 or 41 weeks' gestation with those of the elective induction at 39 weeks' gestation group. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study included 21,282 participants who delivered between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2022. Participants were initially categorized into 3 groups at 39 weeks' gestation, namely elective induction of labor, spontaneous delivery, and expectant management, for the primary analysis in which elective induction was compared with expectant management. Subsequently, the expectant management group at 39 weeks' gestation was divided into 3 groups at 40 weeks, and participants who underwent expectant management at 40 weeks were then divided into 2 groups at 41 weeks' gestation, namely elective induction and spontaneous delivery. In total, 6 groups were compared in the secondary analysis with the elective induction at 39 weeks' gestation group serving as the reference group. RESULTS: At 39 weeks' gestational age, participants who underwent elective induction of labor had a significantly lower risk for the primary composite outcomes than participants who were managed expectantly (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.55-0.95), and there was no significant difference in the risk for cesarean delivery between the 2 groups. After further dividing the expectantly managed group and comparing them with participants who underwent elective induction of labor at 39 weeks' gestation, those who underwent spontaneous delivery at 40 weeks' gestation had significantly lower risks for cesarean delivery (0.61; 0.52-0.71) and chorioamnionitis (0.78; 0.61-1.00) but a higher risk for fetal distress (1.39; 1.22-1.57); those with spontaneous delivery at 41 weeks' gestation had a significantly higher risk for fetal distress (1.44; 1.16-1.79), postpartum hemorrhage (1.83; 1.26-2.66), and prolonged or arrested labor (1.61; 1.02-2.54). Moreover, when compared with participants who underwent elective induction of labor at 39 weeks' gestation, participants who were induced later in gestation had significantly higher risks for adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes, especially at 40 weeks' gestation. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks' gestation was significantly associated with lower risks for adverse short-term neonatal and maternal outcomes when compared with expectant management. Moreover, our study highlights the nuanced trade-offs in risks and benefits between elective induction at 39 weeks' gestation and waiting for spontaneous labor or delayed induction at 40 or 41 weeks' gestation, thus providing valuable insights for clinical decision-making in practice.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) in the United States, the ARRIVE trial, has indicated that induction of labor (IOL) in low-risk nulliparous women with a gestational age (GA) of 39 weeks compared to expectant management (EM) resulted in a significant lower rate of cesarean deliveries. The Dutch maternity care system is different compared to the United States with, among other factors, an overall significantly lower percentage of caesarean sections (CS). To investigate whether IOL has a favorable outcome in the Dutch maternity care system, a new trial is advised. In this questionnaire-based study we aim to evaluate whether Dutch low-risk pregnant women would be willing to participate in an RCT comparing IOL at 39 weeks to EM. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted an online survey in 2020 in the Netherlands. Respondent recruitment took place both in outpatient clinics at hospitals and midwife practices and via social media. Inclusion criteria were pregnant women with singleton gestation, GA ≤ 39 weeks, age 18 years or older and residency in the Netherlands. Exclusion criteria were multiple gestation, a history of a CS, planned IOL or CS in current pregnancy and GA > 39 weeks. A subgroup was formed of low risk (receiving primary care) nulliparous women with a gestational age between 34 and 39 weeks, comparable with the ARRIVE trial. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty respondents participated. Of all respondents (nulli- and multiparous), 47 (12.4%) would be willing to participate in the hypothetical RCT and 70 (18.4%) might be willing to participate. Amongst the 70 women in the subgroup 11 women (15.7%) would be willing to participate and 17 (24.3%) might be willing to participate. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Calculating sample size in a country with a low CS rate, in relation to 69.2% of women are not willing to participate in an RCT comparing IOL at 39 weeks with EM, would require >18.000 women to be counselled for participation. We believe such a study is a challenge in the Netherlands.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence supports elective induction of labor at 39 weeks in low-risk pregnancies to improve maternal and perinatal outcomes. This evidence includes the ARRIVE trial (A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management). However, concerns have been raised on the external validity of the ARRIVE trial, especially with regard to the demographic and clinical characteristics of the pregnant women recruited. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the outcomes in a cohort of consecutive pregnant women, who fulfilled the criteria of the ARRIVE trial and were managed expectantly in an Italian referral academic hospital, with those reported in the expectant and induction arms of the ARRIVE trial. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective single-center study. Consecutive low-risk nulliparous women who fulfilled the ARRIVE trial criteria were evaluated for eligibility at 36-38 weeks of gestation. Those who neither developed complications nor delivered spontaneously before 39 weeks were eligible for this comparative analysis. Maternal and fetal growth and wellbeing were screened and monitored from 36 to 38 weeks of gestation. RESULTS: A total of 1696 patients met the established criteria at recruitment. Of these, 343 spontaneously delivered in <39 weeks, 82 delivered because of maternal indication, and 37 for fetal indication. A total of 1234 pregnant women were eligible for comparison with the elective induction and the expectant management groups of the ARRIVE trial. The socioeconomic status was significantly better, maternal age was significantly higher, and body mass index was significantly lower in our cohort. Cesarean section rate in our cohort was lower than that of the expectant group of the ARRIVE trial (18.7 vs. 22.2%; p = 0.02) and similar to that of the elective induction group (18.7 vs. 18.6%). A new diagnosis of hypertensive disorders during expectant management was noted in 1.6% in our cohort vs. 14.1% in the ARRIVE arm. Among the different obstetric outcomes, only the prevalence of postpartum hemorrhage was not significantly lower in our cohort. The primary perinatal composite outcome was significantly better in our cohort than in both arms of the ARRIVE trial (2.1 vs. 5.4% in the expectant group and 4.3% in the induction group). We did not record cases with an Apgar score ≤ 3 or hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, expectant management in low-risk pregnancies with late preterm screening of feto-maternal well-being seemed to achieve better maternal and perinatal outcomes than a universal policy of induction at 39 weeks. The results of the ARRIVE trial should be carefully evaluated in different demographic and clinical settings and cannot be extended to the general population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Induction of labor continues to become more common. We analyzed induction of labor and timing of obstetric and anesthesia work to create a model to predict the induction-anesthesia interval and the induction-delivery interval in order to co-ordinate workload to occur when staff are most available. METHODS: Patients who underwent induction of labor at a single medical center were identified and multivariable linear regression was used to model anesthesia and delivery times. Data were collected on date of birth, race/ethnicity, body mass index, gestational age, gravidity, parity, indication for labor induction, number of prior deliveries, time of induction, induction agent, cervical dilation, effacement, and fetal station on admission, date and time of anesthesia administration, date and time of delivery, and delivery type. RESULTS: A total of 1746 women met inclusion criteria. Associations which significantly influenced time from induction of labor to anesthesia and delivery included maternal age (anesthesia P <0.001, delivery P =0.002), body mass index (both P <0.001), prior vaginal delivery (both P <0.001), gestational age (anesthesia P <0.001, delivery P <0.018), simplified Bishop score (both P <0.001), and first induction agent (both P <0.001). Induction of labor of nulliparous women at 02:00 h and parous women at 04:00 or 05:00 h had the highest estimated probability of the mother having her first anesthesia encounter and delivering during optimally staffed hours when our institution's specialty personnel are most available. CONCLUSIONS: Time to obstetric and anesthesia tasks can be estimated to optimize induction of labor start times, and shift anesthesia and delivery workload to hours when staff are most available.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is currently not a medical indication for elective induction of labor although obese patients may not be eligible for expectant management after 41 W G. Few data on labor and complications in this population undergoing prolonged pregnancy are known. The objective of our study was to evaluate labor, mode of delivery, maternal and fetal outcomes in prolonged pregnancy in obese patients compared to normal body mass index (BMI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: It was a retrospective cohort study in patients who, after prolonged pregnancy gave birth to a single fetus, in cephalic presentation, between the first of January 2002 and December 31, 2018 in the Caen University Hospital Center. Patient's characteristics were compared within each BMI class using uni- and multivariate analysis with regression logistics models. RESULTS: Overall, 9159 patients were included. Term of birth and spontaneous labor calculated rates were significantly increased in case of obesity (p < 0.001). The adjusted Odds Ratio (ORa) for induced labor in class III obesity was 1.73 [1.13-2.66]. After induction of labor, 83.0 % patients with normal BMI delivered vaginally versus 61.8 % in case of class III obesity (p < 0.001). The ORa for an emergency cesarean was 3.39 [2.04-5.63] and 1.78 [1.06-2.99] for neonatal morbidity in class III obesity. CONCLUSION: Morbid obese patients do not belong to a low risk patient's group when pregnancy is prolonged. Elective induction in case of morbid obesity may entail less risk than allowing the pregnancy to progress after 41 W G or even 39 W G. Further randomized prospective studies are nevertheless required.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of elective induction of labor at 39 weeks' gestation on children's educational outcomes as measured using the Australian National Assessment Program-Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests in school year 3 (∼8 years of age), compared with expectant management. METHODS: We merged perinatal data on all infants born in South Australia from 1999 to 2008 with children's school assessment data from NAPLAN. The study population included all singleton infants born without a malformation at 39-42 weeks in vertex presentation. Children who had undertaken the NAPLAN test in school year 3 were included. We excluded births to women who had a contraindication to vaginal delivery and those with a condition possibly justifying elective delivery before 39 weeks. The outcome of interest was children's educational outcome as measured using NAPLAN, which includes five learning domains (reading, writing, spelling, grammar and numeracy). Each domain was categorized according to performance at or below vs above the national minimum standard (NMS). Average treatment effects (ATEs) of elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management on the proportion of children performing at/below the NMS for each domain were estimated using the augmented inverse-propensity-weighted estimator, accounting for potential confounders. RESULTS: Of 53 843 children born at 39-42 weeks in vertex presentation from 1999 to 2008 and who were expected to participate in the year-3 NAPLAN from 2008 to 2015, a total of 31 120 had at least one year-3 NAPLAN domain. Of these, 1353 children were delivered after elective induction of labor at 39 weeks while 29 767 children were born following expectant management. The ATEs (mean differences) of elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management on the proportion of children scoring at/below the NMS on each domain were 0.01 (95% CI, -0.02 to 0.03) for reading, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.00-0.04) for writing, 0.01 (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.04) for spelling, 0.02 (95% CI, -0.01 to 0.04) for grammar and 0.03 (95% CI, 0.00-0.05) for numeracy. CONCLUSION: Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks did not affect children's standardized literacy and numeracy testing outcomes at 8 years of age when compared with expectant management. © 2020 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The global rise in the rate of induction of labor and cesarean birth shows considerable unexplained variation both within and between countries. Prior research suggests that the extent to which women are engaged in the decision-making process about birth options, such as elective cesarean, induction of labor, or use of fetal monitoring, is heavily influenced by clinician beliefs and preferences. The aim of this study was to investigate the beliefs about labor interventions and birth options held by midwives and obstetric medical staff from 8 Sydney hospitals and assess how the health care providers' beliefs were associated with discipline or years of experience. METHODS: This is a survey study of midwives and obstetric staff that was distributed between November 2018 and July 2019. Modified from the previously validated birth attitudes survey for the Australian context, survey domains include (1) maternal choice and woman's role in birth, (2) safety by mode or place of birth, (3) attitudes toward cesarean birth for preventing urinary incontinence, (4) approaches to decrease cesarean birth rates, and (5) fears of birth mode. Responses were compared between professions and within professions by years of experience using Mann-Whitney U testing. RESULTS: A total of 217 midwives and 58 medical staff completed the survey (response rate, 30.5%). Midwifery staff responses generally favored a physiologic approach to birth, versus beliefs more in favor of intervention (particularly cesarean birth) among medical staff. There was interprofessional discrepancy on most items, particularly regarding safety of mode or place of birth and approaches to decrease cesarean birth rates. Within disciplines, there was more variation in medical staff attitudes than within the midwifery staff. No clinically important differences in beliefs by years of experience were noted. DISCUSSION: Clinicians need to be aware of their own beliefs and preferences about birth as a potential source of bias when counselling women, particularly when there are a range of treatment options and the evidence may not strongly favor one option over another. As both groups had similar perceptions about the importance of women's autonomy, shared decision-making training could help bridge belief gaps and improve care around birth decisions.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Labor induction has been associated with breastfeeding suppression, but reasons for why this association exists have not been well determined. METHODS: We examined the influence of elective labor induction by vaginal prostaglandin at gestational week 41+3days on affective, cognitive, and behavioural adaptations early in puerperium and on breastfeeding pattern at 1 and 3months. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty consecutive puerperae were assigned to two groups: mothers having received vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel (Prepidil®, dinoprostone) before labor (PGE group, n=90) and mothers having received no treatment (unmedicated group, n=90). The day of discharge mothers completed the Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale, (EPDS), State and Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y), and Mother to-Infant Bonding Scale (MIBS). Later they participated in telephone interviews concerning their breastfeeding practices at 1 and 3months, which were classified according to WHO definitions. When compared with unmedicated, PGE group puerperae scored [median, (IQR)] significantly higher EPDS [9 (7-13) vs 5 (3-8), p 0.003], STAI-state [46 (39-51) vs 39 (34-48), p 0.002], STAI-trait [39 (36-48) vs 34 (32-45), p 0.04], and MIBS [10 (5.25-10) vs 5 (3-4), p 0.002] scores. In addition, while the breastfeeding practices were similar at hospital discharge, at follow-up the labor induced mothers were less likely to maintain full breastfeeding with respect to untreated mothers: 1month (p 0.001); and 3months (p 0.003). CONCLUSION: We present evidence that elective induction of labor by prostaglandins at gestational week 41+3days is associated with reduced exclusive breastfeeding rates at 1 and 3months after discharge and higher EPDS, STAI, and MIBS scores.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Elective induction of labor (eIOL) prior to 39 weeks' gestation is discouraged because of presumed fetal benefits. However, few data exist on the maternal risks of expectant management. To date, no study has evaluated the maternal risk of developing a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy with expectant management of a low-risk gravid at term. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the development of hypertensive disorders in term low-risk expectantly managed patients. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study from 19 US hospitals, from 2002 to 2008 (Safe Labor Consortium) including all nonanomalous, cephalic, singleton pregnancies at 37-41 weeks. Women with a history of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, or planned cesarean delivery or from centers with incomplete hypertensive data were excluded. Women with eIOL in each week were compared with women managed expectantly until the next week of gestation or beyond. The primary outcome was the frequency of hypertensive complications. RESULTS: Of 114,651 low-risk deliveries, 12,772 (11.1%) had eIOL. The cohort was 49.2% nulliparous, 51.1% white, and obese (mean body mass index 30.2 kg/m(2)). The risk of developing any hypertension in expectantly managed women was 4.1% after 37 weeks, 3.5% after 38 weeks, 3.2% after 39 weeks, and 2.6% after 40 weeks. Compared with eIOL, women with hypertensive disorders had significantly higher rates of cesarean delivery and maternal morbidities (intensive care unit admission or death, third- or fourth-degree lacerations, maternal infections, and bleeding complications) at each week of gestation and the composite neonatal morbidity at 38 and 39 weeks of gestation. CONCLUSION: For women at low risk expectantly managed at term, there is a risk of developing hypertensive complications for each additional week of pregnancy, with associated increases in maternal and neonatal morbidities.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The recommendation for elective induction of labor (IOL) is to await ≥ 39 weeks. Studies show earlier maturity of Blacks compared to Whites. The objective was to examine the effect of the Black race on the risk of intrapartum and neonatal complications after IOL. METHODS: Black women with non-indicated IOL at 37-42 weeks were selected from the CDC-Birth Cohorts 2007-2010. Congenital anomalies, hypertension/diabetes, low-birth weight, breech presentation, previous cesarean and premature rupture of membranes were excluded. Intrapartum/neonatal complications were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios, using 39 weeks as reference. RESULTS: 311,264 black were compared with 2,451,774 deliveries of other races. For Blacks, the risks of cesarean delivery and intrapartum complications were lower at 38 weeks. Chance of vaginal delivery was greater at 38 weeks. Risks of neonatal complications was not increased at 38 compared to 39 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Intrapartum complications were lower at 38 than at 39 weeks in Blacks with no increased risk of neonatal complications. Meconium staining and fetal distress were higher as early as at 40 weeks, perhaps due to accelerated maturation. While a 39-week goal is simple and benefits many patients, a more "personalized medicine" approach may benefit even more mothers and babies.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Elective induction of labor has been discouraged over concerns regarding increased complications. We evaluated the mode of delivery and maternal and neonatal morbidities in low-risk patients whose labor was electively induced or expectantly managed at term. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study from 12 US institutions (19 hospitals), 2002 through 2008 (Safe Labor Consortium). Healthy women with viable, vertex singleton pregnancies at 37-41 weeks of gestation were included. Women electively induced in each week were compared with women managed expectantly. The primary outcome was mode of delivery. RESULTS: Of 131,243 low-risk deliveries, 13,242 (10.1%) were electively induced. The risk of cesarean delivery was lower at each week of gestation with elective induction vs expectant management regardless of parity and modified Bishop score (for unfavorable nulliparous patients at: 37 weeks = 18.6% vs 34.2%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.40; [95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.88]; 38 weeks = 28.4% vs 35.4%, 0.65 [0.49-0.85]; 39 weeks = 23.6% vs 38.5%, 0.47 [0.38-0.57]; 40 weeks = 32.3% vs 42.3%, 0.70 [0.59-0.81]). Maternal infections were significantly lower with elective inductions. Major, minor, and respiratory neonatal morbidity composites were lower with elective inductions at ≥38 weeks (for nulliparous patients at: 38 weeks = adjusted odds ratio, 0.43; [95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.72]; 39 weeks = 0.75 [0.61-0.92]; 40 weeks = 0.65 [0.54-0.80]). CONCLUSION: Elective induction of labor at term is associated with decreased risks of cesarean delivery and other maternal and neonatal morbidities compared with expectant management regardless of parity or cervical status on admission.

Asunto(s)