Adverse intrapartum outcome in pregnancies complicated by small for gestational age and late fetal growth restriction undergoing induction of labor with Dinoprostone, Misoprostol or mechanical methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis.


Journal

European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology
ISSN: 1872-7654
Titre abrégé: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol
Pays: Ireland
ID NLM: 0375672

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2020
Historique:
received: 01 04 2020
revised: 30 06 2020
accepted: 10 07 2020
pubmed: 2 8 2020
medline: 15 5 2021
entrez: 2 8 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To investigate the outcome of pregnancies with small baby, including both small for gestational age (SGA) and late fetal growth restriction (FGR) fetuses, undergoing induction of labor (IOL) with Dinoprostone, Misoprostol or mechanical methods. Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were non-anomalous singleton pregnancies complicated by the presence of a small fetus, defined as a fetus with estimated fetal weight (EFW) or abdominal circumference (AC) <10th centile undergoing IOL from 34 weeks of gestation with vaginal Dinoprostone, vaginal misoprostol, or mechanical methods (including either Foley or Cook balloon catheters). The primary outcome was a composite measure of adverse intrapartum outcome. Secondary outcomes were the individual components of the primary outcome, perinatal mortality and morbidity. All the explored outcomes were reported in three different sub-groups of pregnancies complicated by a small fetus including: all small fetuses (defined as those with an EFW and/or AC <10th centile irrespective of fetal Doppler status), late FGR fetuses (defined as those with EFW and/or AC <3rd centile or AC/EFW <10th centile associated with abnormal cerebroplacental Dopplers) and SGA fetuses (defined as those with EFW and/or AC <10th but >3rd centile with normal cerebroplacental Dopplers). Quality assessment of each included study was performed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions tool (ROBINS-I), while the GRADE methodology was used to assess the quality of the body of retrieved evidence. Meta-analyses of proportions and individual data random-effect logistic regression were used to analyze the data. 12 studies (1711 pregnancies) were included. In the overall population of small fetuses, composite adverse intra-partum outcome occurred in 21.2 % (95 % CI 10.0-34.9) of pregnancies induced with Dinoprostone, 18.0 % (95 % CI 6.9-32.5) of those with Misoprostol and 11.6 % (95 % CI 5.5-19.3) of those undergoing IOL with mechanical methods. Cesarean section (CS) for non-reassuring fetal status (NRFS) was required in 18.1 % (95 % CI 9.9-28.3) of pregnancies induced with Dinoprostone, 9.4 % (95 % CI 1.4-22.0) of those with Misoprostol and 8.1 % (95 % CI 5.0-11.6) of those undergoing mechanical induction. Likewise, uterine tachysystole, was recorded on CTG in 13.8 % (95 % CI 6.9-22.3) of cases induced with Dinoprostone, 7.5 % (95 % CI 2.1-15.4) of those with Misoprostol and 3.8 % (95 % CI 0-4.4) of those induced with mechanical methods. Composite adverse perinatal outcome following delivery complicated 2.9 % (95 % CI 0.5-6.7) newborns after IOL with Dinoprostone, 0.6 % (95 % CI 0-2.5) with Misoprostol and 0.7 % (95 % CI 0-7.1) with mechanical methods. In pregnancies complicated by late FGR, adverse intrapartum outcome occurred in 25.3 % (95 % CI 18.8-32.5) of women undergoing IOL with Dinoprostone, compared to 7.4 % (95 % CI 3.9-11.7) of those with mechanical methods, while CS for NRFS was performed in 23.8 % (95 % CI 17.3-30.9) and 6.2 % (95 % CI 2.8-10.5) of the cases, respectively. Finally, in SGA fetuses, composite adverse intrapartum outcome complicated 8.4 % (95 % CI 4.6-13.0) of pregnancies induced with Dinoprostone, 18.6 % (95 % CI 13.1-25.2) of those with Misoprostol and 8.7 (95 % CI 2.5-17.5) of those undergoing mechanical IOL, while CS for NRF was performed in 8.4 % (95 % CI 4.6-13.0) of women induced with Dinoprostone, 18.6 % (95 % CI 13.1-25.2) of those with Misoprostol and 8.7 % (95 % CI 2.5-17.5) of those undergoing mechanical induction. Overall, the quality of the included studies was low and was downgraded due to considerable clinical and statistical heterogeneity. There is limited evidence on the optimal type of IOL in pregnancies with small fetuses. Mechanical methods seem to be associated with a lower occurrence of adverse intrapartum outcomes, but a direct comparison between different techniques could not be performed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32738675
pii: S0301-2115(20)30462-0
doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.07.020
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Misoprostol 0E43V0BB57
Dinoprostone K7Q1JQR04M

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Review Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

455-467

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Alessandra Familiari (A)

Department of Clinical and Community Sciences, University of Milan, and Department of Woman Child and Neonate, Fondazione IRCCS Cà Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.

Asma Khalil (A)

Fetal Medicine Unit, St George's Hospital, London, United Kingdom; Vascular Biology Research Centre, Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute, St George's University of London, United Kingdom.

Giuseppe Rizzo (G)

Division of Maternal and Fetal Medicine, Ospedale Cristo Re, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The First I.M. Sechenov Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.

Anthony Odibo (A)

Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.

Patrizia Vergani (P)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, FMBBM Foundation, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy.

Danilo Buca (D)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chieti, Italy.

Nobuhiro Hidaka (N)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.

Daniele Di Mascio (D)

Department of Maternal and Child Health and Urological Sciences, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Rome, Italy; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Chinedu Nwabuobi (C)

Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.

Serena Simeone (S)

Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.

Federico Mecacci (F)

Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.

Silvia Visentin (S)

Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.

Eric Cosmi (E)

Gynecology and Obstetrics Unit, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Padua, Padua, Italy.

Marco Liberati (M)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chieti, Italy.

Alice D'Amico (A)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Chieti, Italy.

Maria Elena Flacco (ME)

Department of Medical Sciences, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Cecilia Acuti Martellucci (CA)

Section of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Lamberto Manzoli (L)

Section of Hygiene and Preventive Medicine, Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy.

Luigi Nappi (L)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Italy.

Carlotta Iacovella (C)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bürgerhospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.

Franz Bahlmann (F)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bürgerhospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.

Karen Melchiorre (K)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Santo Spirito Hospital, Pescara, Italy.

Giovanni Scambia (G)

Gynaecologic Oncology, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

Vincenzo Berghella (V)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Francesco D'Antonio (F)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Foggia, Italy. Electronic address: francesco.dantonio@unifg.it.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH