Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Nulliparous Participants Undergoing Labor Induction by Cervical Ripening Method.
Journal
American journal of perinatology
ISSN: 1098-8785
Titre abrégé: Am J Perinatol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8405212
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2023
07 2023
Historique:
pmc-release:
05
02
2023
medline:
12
7
2023
pubmed:
6
8
2021
entrez:
5
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study aimed to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes by method of cervical ripening for labor induction among low-risk nulliparous individuals. This is a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial of labor induction at 39 weeks versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous participants. Participants undergoing cervical ripening for labor induction in either group were included. Participants were excluded for preripening membrane rupture, abruption, chorioamnionitis, fetal demise, or cervical dilation ≥3.5 cm. Cervical ripening was defined by the initial method used: prostaglandin only (PGE; referent), Foley with concurrent prostaglandin (Foley-PGE), Foley only (Foley), and Foley with concurrent oxytocin (Foley-oxytocin). Coprimary outcomes were adverse maternal and neonatal composites. Secondary outcomes included cesarean delivery and length of labor and delivery (L&D) stay. Multivariable analysis was used to adjust for patient characteristics. Of 6,106 participants included in the trial, 2,376 (38.9%) met criteria for this analysis. Of these, 1,247 (52.4%) had cervical ripening with PGE, 290 (12.2%) had Foley-PGE, 385 (16.2%) had Foley, and 454 (19.1%) had Foley-oxytocin. The maternal composite outcome was similar among participants who received Foley-PGE (24.1%, adjusted relative risk [aRR] = 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-1.52), Foley (21.3%, aRR = 1.16, 95% CI: 0.92-1.45), or Foley-oxytocin (19.4%, aRR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.83-1.29), compared with PGE (19.7%). The neonatal composite outcome was less frequent in participants who received the Foley-PGE (2.4%, aRR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.16-0.75) or Foley (3.6%, aRR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.29-0.89) but did not reach statistical significance for participants who received Foley-oxytocin (4.6%, aRR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.40-1.01) compared with PGE only (6.8%). Participants who received Foley-PGE or Foley-oxytocin had a shorter L&D stay (adjusted mean difference = -1.97 hours, 95% CI: -3.45 to -0.49 and -5.92 hours, 95% CI: -7.07 to -4.77, respectively), compared with PGE. In term low-risk nulliparous participants, Foley alone or concurrent with PGE is associated with a lower risk of adverse neonatal outcomes than with PGE alone. Length of L&D stay was the shortest with concurrent Foley-oxytocin. · Adverse maternal outcomes are similar among different methods of cervical ripening in low-risk women.. · Adverse neonatal outcomes are less frequent with use of Foley alone or in combination with PGE.. · The use of Foley alone, or in combination with other agents, appears to be beneficial..
Identifiants
pubmed: 34352922
doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1732379
pmc: PMC8817048
mid: NIHMS1733114
doi:
Substances chimiques
Oxytocin
50-56-6
Oxytocics
0
Dinoprostone
K7Q1JQR04M
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Multicenter Study
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1061-1070Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD040500
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD034116
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD040560
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD053097
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD040485
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD034116
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD068258
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD040560
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD036801
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD027869
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD068268
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD040544
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR001863
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD087230
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD027915
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD087192
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD040544
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD034208
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD040512
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD027869
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD027915
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD068282
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD040545
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD040485
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD068268
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD034208
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD068258
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD053097
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD040500
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : UG1 HD068282
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD040512
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1 TR001873
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : U10 HD040545
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCATS NIH HHS
ID : UL1TR001873
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Thieme. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None declared.
Références
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Mar;281(3):473-7
pubmed: 19488776
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013 Jan 29;13:25
pubmed: 23356673
N Engl J Med. 2018 Aug 09;379(6):513-523
pubmed: 30089070
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Dec;128(6):1357-1364
pubmed: 27824758
Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Mar;89(3):387-91
pubmed: 9052591
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jun;190(6):1689-94; discussion 1694-6
pubmed: 15284771
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Sep;177(3):612-8
pubmed: 9322632
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Nov;203(5):418-29
pubmed: 20605133
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2011 Sep;90(9):997-1004
pubmed: 21615714
Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jun;111(6):1320-6
pubmed: 18515515
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003 Apr;13(4):254-9
pubmed: 12854927
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2004 Sep;86(3):398-400
pubmed: 15325864
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Sep;219(3):294.e1-294.e6
pubmed: 29763609
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jan;131(1):23-29
pubmed: 29215514
Sao Paulo Med J. 2003 May 5;121(3):102-6
pubmed: 12920470
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Nov;181(5 Pt 1):1108-12
pubmed: 10561627
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Sep;199(3):305.e1-5
pubmed: 18771993
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2013 Feb;35(2):60-5
pubmed: 23412004
BJOG. 2011 May;118(6):647-54
pubmed: 21332637
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Mar 14;(3):CD001233
pubmed: 22419277
BJOG. 2016 Feb;123(3):346-54
pubmed: 26538408
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Jan;180(1 Pt 1):55-60
pubmed: 9914578
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2013 Jun 28;62(1):1-69, 72
pubmed: 24974591