Induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks: A systematic review and an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised trials.
Adult
Delivery, Obstetric
/ adverse effects
Female
Gestational Age
Humans
Infant
Infant Death
Infant Mortality
Labor, Induced
/ adverse effects
Live Birth
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Complications
/ mortality
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Treatment Outcome
Watchful Waiting
Journal
PLoS medicine
ISSN: 1549-1676
Titre abrégé: PLoS Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101231360
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
21
07
2020
accepted:
26
10
2020
entrez:
8
12
2020
pubmed:
9
12
2020
medline:
2
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The risk of perinatal death and severe neonatal morbidity increases gradually after 41 weeks of pregnancy. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed if induction of labour (IOL) in uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks will improve perinatal outcomes. We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) on this subject. We searched PubMed, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Embase), The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and PsycINFO on February 21, 2020 for RCTs comparing IOL at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in women with uncomplicated pregnancies. Individual participant data (IPD) were sought from eligible RCTs. Primary outcome was a composite of severe adverse perinatal outcomes: mortality and severe neonatal morbidity. Additional outcomes included neonatal admission, mode of delivery, perineal lacerations, and postpartum haemorrhage. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted for parity (nulliparous/multiparous), maternal age (<35/≥35 years), and body mass index (BMI) (<30/≥30). Aggregate data meta-analysis (MA) was performed to include data from RCTs for which IPD was not available. From 89 full-text articles, we identified three eligible RCTs (n = 5,161), and two contributed with IPD (n = 4,561). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups regarding age, parity, BMI, and higher level of education. IOL resulted overall in a decrease of severe adverse perinatal outcome (0.4% [10/2,281] versus 1.0% [23/2,280]; relative risk [RR] 0.43 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 to 0.91], p-value 0.027, risk difference [RD] -57/10,000 [95% CI -106/10,000 to -8/10,000], I2 0%). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 175 (95% CI 94 to 1,267). Perinatal deaths occurred in one (<0.1%) versus eight (0.4%) pregnancies (Peto odds ratio [OR] 0.21 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.78], p-value 0.019, RD -31/10,000, [95% CI -56/10,000 to -5/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 326, [95% CI 177 to 2,014]) and admission to a neonatal care unit ≥4 days occurred in 1.1% (24/2,280) versus 1.9% (46/2,273), (RR 0.52 [95% CI 0.32 to 0.85], p-value 0.009, RD -97/10,000 [95% CI -169/10,000 to -26/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 103 [95% CI 59 to 385]). There was no difference in the rate of cesarean delivery (10.5% versus 10.7%; RR 0.98, [95% CI 0.83 to 1.16], p-value 0.81) nor in other important perinatal, delivery, and maternal outcomes. MA on aggregate data showed similar results. Prespecified subgroup analyses for the primary outcome showed a significant difference in the treatment effect (p = 0.01 for interaction) for parity, but not for maternal age or BMI. The risk of severe adverse perinatal outcome was decreased for nulliparous women in the IOL group (0.3% [4/1,219] versus 1.6% [20/1,264]; RR 0.20 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.60], p-value 0.004, RD -127/10,000, [95% CI -204/10,000 to -50/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 79 [95% CI 49 to 201]) but not for multiparous women (0.6% [6/1,219] versus 0.3% [3/1,264]; RR 1.59 [95% CI 0.15 to 17.30], p-value 0.35, RD 27/10,000, [95% CI -29/10,000 to 84/10,000], I2 55%). A limitation of this IPD-MA was the risk of overestimation of the effect on perinatal mortality due to early stopping of the largest included trial for safety reasons after the advice of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Furthermore, only two RCTs were eligible for the IPD-MA; thus, the possibility to assess severe adverse neonatal outcomes with few events was limited. In this study, we found that, overall, IOL at 41 weeks improved perinatal outcome compared with expectant management until 42 weeks without increasing the cesarean delivery rate. This benefit is shown only in nulliparous women, whereas for multiparous women, the incidence of mortality and morbidity was too low to demonstrate any effect. The magnitude of risk reduction of perinatal mortality remains uncertain. Women with pregnancies approaching 41 weeks should be informed on the risk differences according to parity so that they are able to make an informed choice for IOL at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks. Study Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020163174.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The risk of perinatal death and severe neonatal morbidity increases gradually after 41 weeks of pregnancy. Several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have assessed if induction of labour (IOL) in uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks will improve perinatal outcomes. We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) on this subject.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We searched PubMed, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (Embase), The Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and PsycINFO on February 21, 2020 for RCTs comparing IOL at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in women with uncomplicated pregnancies. Individual participant data (IPD) were sought from eligible RCTs. Primary outcome was a composite of severe adverse perinatal outcomes: mortality and severe neonatal morbidity. Additional outcomes included neonatal admission, mode of delivery, perineal lacerations, and postpartum haemorrhage. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted for parity (nulliparous/multiparous), maternal age (<35/≥35 years), and body mass index (BMI) (<30/≥30). Aggregate data meta-analysis (MA) was performed to include data from RCTs for which IPD was not available. From 89 full-text articles, we identified three eligible RCTs (n = 5,161), and two contributed with IPD (n = 4,561). Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups regarding age, parity, BMI, and higher level of education. IOL resulted overall in a decrease of severe adverse perinatal outcome (0.4% [10/2,281] versus 1.0% [23/2,280]; relative risk [RR] 0.43 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 to 0.91], p-value 0.027, risk difference [RD] -57/10,000 [95% CI -106/10,000 to -8/10,000], I2 0%). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 175 (95% CI 94 to 1,267). Perinatal deaths occurred in one (<0.1%) versus eight (0.4%) pregnancies (Peto odds ratio [OR] 0.21 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.78], p-value 0.019, RD -31/10,000, [95% CI -56/10,000 to -5/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 326, [95% CI 177 to 2,014]) and admission to a neonatal care unit ≥4 days occurred in 1.1% (24/2,280) versus 1.9% (46/2,273), (RR 0.52 [95% CI 0.32 to 0.85], p-value 0.009, RD -97/10,000 [95% CI -169/10,000 to -26/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 103 [95% CI 59 to 385]). There was no difference in the rate of cesarean delivery (10.5% versus 10.7%; RR 0.98, [95% CI 0.83 to 1.16], p-value 0.81) nor in other important perinatal, delivery, and maternal outcomes. MA on aggregate data showed similar results. Prespecified subgroup analyses for the primary outcome showed a significant difference in the treatment effect (p = 0.01 for interaction) for parity, but not for maternal age or BMI. The risk of severe adverse perinatal outcome was decreased for nulliparous women in the IOL group (0.3% [4/1,219] versus 1.6% [20/1,264]; RR 0.20 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.60], p-value 0.004, RD -127/10,000, [95% CI -204/10,000 to -50/10,000], I2 0%, NNT 79 [95% CI 49 to 201]) but not for multiparous women (0.6% [6/1,219] versus 0.3% [3/1,264]; RR 1.59 [95% CI 0.15 to 17.30], p-value 0.35, RD 27/10,000, [95% CI -29/10,000 to 84/10,000], I2 55%). A limitation of this IPD-MA was the risk of overestimation of the effect on perinatal mortality due to early stopping of the largest included trial for safety reasons after the advice of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Furthermore, only two RCTs were eligible for the IPD-MA; thus, the possibility to assess severe adverse neonatal outcomes with few events was limited.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, we found that, overall, IOL at 41 weeks improved perinatal outcome compared with expectant management until 42 weeks without increasing the cesarean delivery rate. This benefit is shown only in nulliparous women, whereas for multiparous women, the incidence of mortality and morbidity was too low to demonstrate any effect. The magnitude of risk reduction of perinatal mortality remains uncertain. Women with pregnancies approaching 41 weeks should be informed on the risk differences according to parity so that they are able to make an informed choice for IOL at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks. Study Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020163174.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33290410
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003436
pii: PMEDICINE-D-20-03510
pmc: PMC7723286
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1003436Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: BWM is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) BWM reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck Merck KGaA and Guerbet
Références
PLoS Med. 2019 Jul 2;16(7):e1002838
pubmed: 31265456
Midwives. 2014;17(3):8
pubmed: 24960940
JAMA. 2010 Mar 24;303(12):1180-7
pubmed: 20332404
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005 Jun 1;120(2):164-9
pubmed: 15925045
BMJ Open. 2019 Dec 16;9(12):e032815
pubmed: 31848171
JAMA. 2015 Apr 28;313(16):1657-65
pubmed: 25919529
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Dec;96(12):1467-1474
pubmed: 28963726
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 09;5:CD004945
pubmed: 29741208
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2019 Feb;17(2):170-208
pubmed: 30299344
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017 Jul;96(7):862-867
pubmed: 28186614
PLoS Med. 2020 May 22;17(5):e1003103
pubmed: 32442207
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16;(3):CD006593
pubmed: 18646160
BMJ. 2019 Feb 20;364:l344
pubmed: 30786997
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2017 Jul;102(4):F286-F290
pubmed: 26645539
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Jan;90(1):26-32
pubmed: 21275912
PLoS One. 2015 May 11;10(5):e0126266
pubmed: 25961723
Lancet. 2016 Feb 6;387(10018):587-603
pubmed: 26794078
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 May 22;19(1):181
pubmed: 31117985
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1997 Aug;76(7):658-62
pubmed: 9292640
BMJ. 2019 Nov 20;367:l6131
pubmed: 31748223
Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Aug;124(2 Pt 1):390-6
pubmed: 25050770
Eval Health Prof. 2002 Mar;25(1):76-97
pubmed: 11868447
PLoS Med. 2015 Jul 21;12(7):e1001855
pubmed: 26196287
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017 Aug;39(8):e164-e174
pubmed: 28729108
BJOG. 2015 Apr;122(5):720-8
pubmed: 25204886
BMJ. 2019 Oct 15;367:l5517
pubmed: 31615781
BJOG. 2014 Aug;121(9):1108-15; discussion 1116
pubmed: 24593288
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Oct;126(4):e52-5
pubmed: 26393460
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jul 15;7:CD004945
pubmed: 32666584
BMJ. 2013 Jun 13;346:f3263
pubmed: 23766482
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018 Apr;97(4):445-453
pubmed: 28832917
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 27;12(7):e0180846
pubmed: 28749944
J Perinat Med. 2010 Mar;38(2):111-9
pubmed: 20156009
Acta Paediatr. 1996 Jul;85(7):843-8
pubmed: 8819552