Risk factors for labour induction and augmentation: a multicentre prospective cohort study in India.

Background: Guidelines for labour induction/augmentation involve evaluating maternal and fetal complications, and allowing informed decisions from pregnant women. This study aimed to comprehensively explore clinical and non-clinical factors influencing labour induction and augmentation in an Indian population. Methods: A prospective cohort study included 9305 pregnant women from 13 hospitals across India. Self-reported maternal socio-demographic and lifestyle factors, and maternal medical and obstetric histories from medical records were obtained at recruitment (≥28 weeks of gestation), and women were followed up within 48 h after childbirth. Maternal and fetal clinical information were classified based on guidelines into four groups of clinical factors: (i) ≥2 indications, (ii) one indication, (iii) no indication and (iv) contraindication. Associations of clinical and non-clinical factors (socio-demographic, healthcare utilisation and lifestyle related) with labour induction and augmentation were investigated using multivariable logistic regression analyses. Findings: Over two-fifths (n = 3936, 42.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 41.3-43.3%) of the study population experienced labour induction and more than a quarter (n = 2537, 27.3%, 95% CI 26.4-28.2%) experienced augmentation. Compared with women with ≥2 indications, those with one (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.50, 95% CI 0.42-0.58) or no indication (aOR 0.24, 95% CI 0.20-0.28) or with contraindications (aOR 0.12, 95% CI 0.07-0.20) were less likely to be induced, adjusting for non-clinical characteristics. These associations were similar for labour augmentation. Notably, 34% of women who were induced or augmented did not have any clinical indication. Several maternal demographic (age at labour, parity and body mass index in early pregnancy), healthcare utilization (number of antenatal check-ups, duration of iron-folic acid supplementation and individuals managing childbirth) and socio-economic factors (religion, living below poverty line, maternal education and partner's occupation) were independently associated with labour induction and augmentation. Interpretation: Although decisions about induction and augmentation of labour in our study population in India were largely guided by clinical recommendations, we cannot ignore that more than a third of the women did not have an indication. Decisions could also be influenced by non-clinical factors which need further research. Funding: The MaatHRI platform is funded by a Medical Research Council Career Development Award (Grant Ref: MR/P022030/1) and a Transition Support Award (Grant Ref: MR/W029294/1).

Oral misoprostol alone, compared with oral misoprostol followed by oxytocin, in women induced for hypertension of pregnancy: A multicentre randomised trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether, in those requiring continuing uterine stimulation after cervical ripening with oral misoprostol and membrane rupture, augmentation with low-dose oral misoprostol is superior to intravenous oxytocin. DESIGN: Open-label, superiority randomised trial. SETTING: Government hospitals in India. POPULATION: Women who were induced for hypertensive disease in pregnancy and had undergone cervical ripening with oral misoprostol, but required continuing stimulation after artificial membrane rupture. METHODS: Participants received misoprostol (25 micrograms, orally, 2-hourly) or titrated oxytocin through an infusion pump. All women had one-to-one care; fetal monitoring was conducted using a mixture of intermittent and continuous electronic fetal monitoring. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Caesarean birth. RESULTS: A total of 520 women were randomised and the baseline characteristics were comparable between the groups. The caesarean section rate was not reduced with the use of misoprostol (misoprostol, 84/260, 32.3%, vs oxytocin, 71/260, 27.3%; aOR 1.23; 95% CI 0.81-1.85; P = 0.33). The interval from randomisation to birth was somewhat longer with misoprostol (225 min, 207-244 min, vs 194 min, 179-210 min; aOR 1.137; 95% CI 1.023-1.264; P = 0.017). There were no cases of hyperstimulation in either arm. The rates of fetal heart rate abnormalities and maternal side effects were similar. Fewer babies in the misoprostol arm were admitted to the special care unit (10 vs 21 in the oxytocin group; aOR 0.463; 95% CI 0.203-1.058; P = 0.068) and there were no neonatal deaths in the misoprostol group, compared with three neonatal deaths in the oxytocin arm. Women's acceptability ratings were high in both study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Following cervical preparation with oral misoprostol and membrane rupture, the use of continuing oral misoprostol for augmentation did not significantly reduce caesarean rates, compared with the use of oxytocin. There were no hyperstimulation or significant adverse events in either arm of the trial.

Obesity at term: What to consider? How to deliver?

Obesity presents significant challenges during pregnancy, increasing the risk of complications and adverse outcomes for both mother and baby. With the rising prevalence of obesity among pregnant women, questions arise regarding optimal management, including timing of delivery and choice of delivery mode. Labour induction in obese women may require a combination of mechanical and pharmacological methods due to increased risk of failed induction. Caesarean section in obese women presents unique challenges, requiring comprehensive perioperative planning and specialized care to optimize outcomes. However, specific guidelines tailored to obese patients undergoing caesarean sections are lacking. Postpartum care should include vigilant monitoring for complications. Addressing obesity in pregnancy necessitates a multidisciplinary approach and specialized care to ensure the best outcomes.

Is epidural analgesia non-inferior to intrathecal fentanyl as initiation for neuraxial analgesia in early non-spontaneous labour?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intrathecal fentanyl, using the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique, provides rapid analgesia during early labour. Because of the technique's more complex and invasive nature, as its replacement we assessed the use of epidural analgesia in primiparous parturients with induced labour. The study was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04645823). The aim was to compare the efficacy, duration of analgesia and maternal satisfaction. The primary outcome was the difference in pain visual analogue scale (VAS) between the interventions at 20 min after the analgesia administration. METHODS: Sixty volunteering parturients were randomly allocated in 1:1 ratio to receive either intrathecal fentanyl 20 µg or epidural analgesia (fentanyl 100 µg and lidocaine 80 mg). Contraction pain and maternal satisfaction were assessed by 0-100 mm VAS for 30 min, respectively. Foetal heart rate abnormalities, the time to first epidural dose and the incidence of pruritus were recorded. Non-inferiority margin for mean (95% CI) VAS after epidural analgesia was set at 20 mm above the VAS value for intrathecal fentanyl at 20 min. RESULTS: The contraction pain VAS fell from (median [interquartile range, IQR]) 82 (14) to 13 (20) mm and 76 (17) to 12 (27) mm in 20 min following the intrathecal fentanyl and epidural analgesia, respectively. The absolute mean difference (epidural-intrathecal fentanyl) in the VAS values was 3.3(-0.06 to 6.66) mm indicating non-inferiority. The median time to reach VAS <30 mm was 10 min in both groups. The duration until request for supplemental analgesia was 82(69-95) and 91(75-106) min after intrathecal fentanyl and epidural analgesia, respectively. The difference for the duration (epidural-intrathecal fentanyl) was 9 (6-12) min and for satisfaction-VAS 0.3 (-3.0 to 3.7) mm. There were no differences between the groups in the incidence of foetal heart rate abnormalities, while pruritus was more common after intrathecal fentanyl. CONCLUSION: After 20 min, epidural analgesia by lidocaine and fentanyl was within the non-inferior threshold compared with intrathecal fentanyl in efficacy. The duration of action was not shorter than that of intrathecal fentanyl and maternal satisfaction was also similar.

Effect of misoprostol versus oxytocin on delivery outcomes after labour induction in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

A large number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been published on the effects of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery outcomes; however, data from these RCTs are conflicting. Although some meta-analyses summarized available findings in this regard, several eligible RCTs have been published since the release of those meta-analyses. Therefore, the current updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs was conducted to compare the effects of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery and neonatal outcomes. A systematic search, using relevant keywords, was done in the online databases of PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science, up to April 2023, to identify eligible articles investigating the effect of oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin on delivery outcomes including maternal [cesarean/vaginal delivery within 24 h after labour induction, Tachysystole, hypertonicity, hyper-stimulation, postpartum hemorrhage (PPH)] and neonatal outcomes [mean Apgar score, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and death]. In total, 45 RCTs with a total sample size of 8406 participants were included. Meta-analysis revealed that vaginal misoprostol administration, compared with oxytocin, resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of cesarean and a significant increase in the rate of vaginal delivery and Tachysystole risk. Also, oral misoprostol was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of cesarean and a significant increase in the risk of hypertonicity compared with oxytocin. However, oral misoprostol had no significant effect on vaginal delivery compared with oxytocin. For other outcomes including hyper-stimulation, perinatal death, NICU admission, and mean Apgar score among newborns, we found no significant difference between oral/vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin. In total, vaginal/oral misoprostol might be a better method for labour induction compared with oxytocin. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023412325.

Perceptions of healthcare professionals regarding labour induction and augmentation: A qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Labour induction and augmentation procedures are commonly used in maternity units with or without medical indications. Research shows that healthcare professionals play a significant role in women's childbirth decisions. AIM: To consolidate healthcare professionals' perceptions about labour induction and augmentation. METHODS: Seven electronic databases were searched from their inception dates till January 2023: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations, and Theses Global. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis and Sandelowski and Barroso's guidelines guided this review. Included studies' quality was appraised by the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool. Data were thematically synthesised. Review findings were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach. FINDINGS: Three main themes were identified from the 17 included studies: 1) Making sense of the phenomenon, 2) Two sides of the coin, and 3) The enlightened path ahead. DISCUSSION: Healthcare professionals' labour induction and augmentation decisions were affected by personal (knowledge and moral philosophies), and external factors (women, community members, colleagues, and healthcare institutions). Some clinicians were unfamiliar with the proper labour induction/augmentation procedures, while others were worried about their decisions and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Suggestions for improvement include conducting labour induction/augmentation training for clinicians, having sufficient resources in facilities, and developing appropriate labour induction/augmentation clinical guidelines. Women and their partners, community members, and traditional healers could benefit from receiving labour induction/augmentation education. To improve health outcomes, healthcare professionals could deliver woman-centred care and collaborate.

Extended balloon labour induction: A single arm proof of concept trial.

Background: Mechanical labour induction with a transcervical balloon is as effective as pharmacological methods, with fewer adverse effects. Its use has been limited to labour induction with an unfavourable cervix able to retain the balloon. We have developed an innovative approach using 2-3 balloons side-by-side to extend the benefits of mechanical labour induction/augmentation with a favourable cervix without having to resort to amniotomy or uterotonics. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of side-by-side balloons for extended labour induction/augmentation. Methods: We conducted a single arm proof of concept trial at Princess Marina Hospital (PMH) in Gaborone, Botswana. Participants were assessed as unsuitable for single balloon labour induction based on a modified Bishop cervical score of 7 or more. Three Foley catheters taped symmetrically side by side were passed through the cervix and inflated with 60mls each. Traction was applied with a weight of 250mls water suspended over the bed-end. The use of uterotonics, time from induction to birth, mode of birth, Apgar scores and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded. Participants' satisfaction with the method of labour induction was assessed using a descriptive scale. Results: We enrolled 20 participants of whom two were nulliparous. Indications for labour induction were mainly late term (70%) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (25%). The mean cervical score was 7.2. Overall, 17 (85%) of the participants achieved a vaginal birth, of whom 5 required oxytocin for labour augmentation. Four of these had requested removal of the balloons, one due to discomfort and three felt the process was taking too long. Three participants underwent caesarean birth. The mean time from initiation of labour induction to vaginal birth was 16 h (standard deviation (SD) 8.4) and 20 h for caesarean birth (SD 10.5). There were no 5-minute Apgar scores below 7 nor neonatal admissions. One baby required brief resuscitation. There were no adverse maternal outcomes. Conclusion: This proof-of-concept study suggests that use of side-by-side balloons in participants with favourable cervix is effective in achieving vaginal birth in most participants without uterotonics or amniotomy. There were no adverse outcomes, though the study was too small to exclude the possibility of rare adverse outcomes. This offers a novel option for labour induction/augmentation, particularly where uterotonics or amniotomy are best avoided such as prior caesarean birth, vertical infection transmission risk and in settings with limited capacity for fetal surveillance. The results clearly justify larger randomized trials to evaluate this novel approach with greater precision. On the basis of the current study we are developing a purpose-designed balloon for extended balloon labour induction.

A nationwide, prospective, cohort study on exogenous oxytocin and delays in early child development: the Japan environment and children's study.

Although it remains debatable, exogenous oxytocin, commonly used for labour induction and augmentation, reportedly increases risks of neurodevelopment delay, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and autism spectrum disorder among children prenatally exposed to exogenous oxytocin. However, only few studies have objectively examined exogenous oxytocin's impact on early childhood development through scoring evaluations. This study investigated the association between exogenous oxytocin exposure and neurodevelopment in 3-year-old children using the Ages and Stages Questionnaires, Third Edition. In this nationwide prospective cohort study, we extracted data from 104,062 foetal records regarding exogenous oxytocin use during labour from the Japan Environment and Children's Study. Participants completed questionnaires throughout the pregnancy and postpartum periods. Outcomes comprised the developmental status less than each cut-off value for the five domains of the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses on the data of 55,400 children after controlling for confounders. Among the 55,400 included women, 19.0% (n = 10,506) used exogenous oxytocin during labour and 81.0% (n = 44,894) did not. Children exposed to exogenous oxytocin showed no significantly increased risk of developmental delay in any domain (communication: odds ratio [OR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-1.16; gross motor: OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87-1.08; fine motor: OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92-1.09; problem-solving: OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.11; personal-social: OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.80-1.03).   Conclusion: Exogenous oxytocin for labour induction did not adversely affect early childhood development. Further studies accounting for the degree of exogenous oxytocin exposure are required to confirm these results. What is Known: • In developed countries, labour is induced in 20-25% of all pregnancies, for which oxytocin is commonly used. • Studies have associated risks of neurodevelopment delay, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and autism spectrum disorder with exposure to exogenous oxytocin. What is New: • Evaluation with the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition, revealed that exogenous oxytocin use did not adversely affect early childhood development. • This prospective study reinforced the lack of evidence of an association between exogenous oxytocin use and early childhood development after adjustment for confounding and rigorous bias elimination.

Indications of Induction and Caesarean Sections Performed Using the Robson Classification in a University Hospital in Spain from 2010 to 2021.

Background: The Robson Ten Group Classification System (RTGCS) enables the assessment, monitoring, and comparison of caesarean section rates both within healthcare facilities and between them, and the indications of caesarean sections (CS) performed in a maternity ward. The aims of the present study were to conduct an analysis to assess the levels and distribution of birth from a descriptive approach by CS in La Ribera University Hospital (Spain) between 2010-2021 using the Robson classification; to describe the indications for the induction of labour and the causes of caesarean sections performed; and to examine the association between the induction of labour and CS birth. Methods: A retrospective study between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2021. All eligible women were classified according to the RTGCS to determine the absolute and relative contribution by each group to the overall CS rate. The odds ratio (OR) of the variables of interest was estimated by logistic regression. In an analysis of the subgroups, the level of significance was adjusted using the Bonferroni method. Results: 20,578 women gave birth during the study period, 19% of them by CS. In 33% of births, induction was performed, and the most common cause was the premature rupture of membranes. Group 2 (nulliparous with induced labour/elective CS before labour) accounted for the largest contribution to the overall rate of CS (31.5%) and showed an upward trend from 23.2% to 39.7% in the time series, increasing the CS rate by 6.7%. The leading cause of CS was suspected fetal distress, followed by induction failure. Conclusions: In our study, Robson Group 2 was identified as the main contributor to the hospital's overall CS rate. Determining the causes of induction and CS in a population sample classified using the RTGCS enables the identification of the groups with the greatest deviation from the optimal rate of CS and the establishment of improvement plans to reduce the overall rate of caesarean sections in the maternity unit.

Intra-cervical Foley Balloon Catheter Versus Prostaglandins for the Induction of Labour: A Literature Review.

Labour induction involves helping a woman to start her labour, before labour begins on its own, for a vaginal birth with the aid of artificial methods, such as medications or other medical techniques. Labour induction is done in cases where extending the pregnancy can threaten the mother or her baby's health, and delivery should result in better outcomes than continuing the pregnancy. Currently, nearly 25% of babies are born by labour induction in economically developed countries. It is often necessary in certain situations to induce labour by using ripening techniques that not only soften the cervix but also make it thin and dilated. Mechanical or pharmacological approaches are used for the artificial induction of labour. Because research articles evaluating the safety and efficacy of various ripening techniques of the cervix vary in terms of their findings, it remains uncertain as to which is the best way to induce labour. In light of this, to find out the most popular interventions for ripening of the cervix during labour induction, we performed a review of the literature that compares the use of a Foley catheter and prostaglandins (misoprostol and dinoprostone). Our findings show that using misoprostol orally is much better than using it vaginally. Foley catheter proved to be the least effective induction technique, despite the fact that it offers the lowest risk.

Synthetic osmotic dilators (Dilapan-S) or dinoprostone vaginal inserts (Propess) for inpatient induction of labour: A UK cost-consequence model.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the costs of synthetic osmotic dilators (Dilapan-S) compared to dinoprostone vaginal inserts (Propess) for inpatient induction of labour (IOL). STUDY DESIGN: A population-level, Markov model-based cost-consequence analysis was developed to compare the impact of using Dilapan-S versus Propess. The time horizon was modelled from admission to birth. The target population was women requiring inpatient IOL from 37 weeks with an unfavourable cervix in the UK. Mean population characteristics reflected those of the SOLVE (NCT03001661) trial. No patient data were included in this analysis. The care pathways and staff workload were modelled using data from the SOLVE trial and clinical experience. Cost and clinical inputs were sourced from the SOLVE trial and peer-reviewed literature. Costs were inflated to 2020 British pounds (GBP, £). Outcomes were reported as an average per woman for total costs and required staff time (minutes) from admission for IOL until birth. The model robustness was assessed using a probabilistic, multivariate sensitivity analysis of 2,000 simulations with results presented as the median (interquartile range, IQR). RESULTS: Dilapan-S was cost neutral compared to Propess. Midwife and obstetrician times were decreased by 146 min (-11%) and 11 min (-54%), respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that in 78% of simulations, use of Dilapan-S reduced midwife time with a median of -160 min (IQR -277 to -24 min). Costs were reduced in 54% of simulations (median -£33, IQR -£319 to £282). CONCLUSIONS: The model indicates that adoption of Dilapan-S is likely to be cost-neutral and reduce staff workload in comparison to Propess. Results require support from real-world data and further exploration of Dilapan-S is to be encouraged.

Effectiveness and safety of membrane sweeping in the prevention of post-term pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial.

There is a rising concern with increasing rates of pharmacologically induced labour and its complications. Membrane sweeping is a simple and less invasive means of initiating spontaneous labour onset. We compared the safety and efficacy of membrane sweeping. A total of 186 women (62 in each arm) were recruited at the antenatal clinic at 39 weeks. The intervention groups had membrane sweeping once and twice weekly respectively while the control arm had no membrane sweeping. They were all monitored and followed up till delivery. The trial was registered with the South Africa registry www.pactr.org (PACTR202112841108933) The incidence of prolonged pregnancy was 32.3%, 19.4% and 11.7% among the control, once-weekly, and twice-weekly groups respectively. The sweeping to the delivery interval was significantly shorter for the twice-weekly group (7.4 days) compared to once weekly (8.8 days) and the control group (10.6 days). There were significantly higher odds of spontaneous labour onset in the twice-weekly group (HR 1.53, p = .029) compared to the control group (HR 0.65, p = .033) and the once-weekly group using once weekly as reference. Membrane sweeping is a safe and effective means of preventing prolonged pregnancy. Twice-weekly sweeping of foetal membranes is more effective than once-weekly or no sweeping without added adverse feto-maternal outcomes.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known about the subject? There is no evidence supporting any increase in maternal or foetal morbidity suggesting that membrane sweeping is a safe procedure to offer to all low-risk pregnant women so as to initiate spontaneous labour onset.What do the results of the study add? Membrane sweeping twice weekly after 39weeks for low-risk pregnant women is more effective than once weekly or no sweep with no added adverse maternal or perinatal risks.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and or further research? Twice-weekly membrane sweeping is encouraged in selected patients to reduce the risks associated with post-term pregnancy.

The Effect of Epidural Analgesia on the Maternal and Fetal Outcomes in Mothers Undergoing Induction of Labour.

Introduction: Elective labour induction is associated with more pain, intrapartum interventions, cesarean deliveries, as compared with spontaneous labour, necessitating the use of labour analgesia. Epidural analgesia is one popular method for control of pain. This study was to determine the effect of epidural analgesia on the maternal and fetal outcomes in women undergoing induction of labour, as adequate data in this specific population is relatively sparse. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted over a period of 18 months which included mothers with singleton term gestation with cephalic presentation admitted for induction of labour. Result: A sample of 238 mothers were included in the study. Among the study population, 52.7% opted for epidural analgesia. The pain score was less than 3/10 (VAS) in 81% of mothers who opted for epidural analgesia. The cesarean section rate was 20.5% and 34.3% in the epidural and non-epidural groups, respectively. After adjusting the confounding factors, there was a positive effect noted in the caesarean section rate among the epidural group, which was lesser than the non-epidural group. However, a higher instrumental delivery rate (18.8% vs. 10.5%, p-value < 0.05) was noted in the epidural group. There was no significant difference in the duration of labour and fetal outcome in the two groups. Conclusion: Epidural analgesia providing good pain relief in the majority of the mothers was reinforced. In our study, epidural analgesia was associated with a reduction of caesarean section rate after adjusting the confounding factor. Epidural analgesia did not affect the duration of labour, cesarean section rate and fetal outcome independently, however, it was associated with increased risk of instrumental delivery. The outcomes mainly depend on the confounding factors. Therefore, mothers can be provided with an evidence-based information regarding the effect of epidural analgesia in induced labour and help those seeking epidural analgesia to make an informed choice. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13224-022-01622-1.

Isosorbide mononitrate for cervical ripening during labour induction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy and safety of isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) in promoting cervical ripening during labour induction. METHODS: Six major databases were searched from inception until 22 April 2021. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed. Various endpoints (n = 21) were meta-analysed, and the endpoints were pooled as mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: In total, 23 RCTs were included in this review, comprising 26 intervention arms and a total of 4305 patients (2210 and 2095 patients were allocated to the IMN and control groups, respectively). Pertaining to obstetric-related maternal outcomes, the pooled analysis showed that admission to delivery time and rate of caesarean delivery were significantly reduced in the IMN group. Moreover, the mean Bishop score and the mean change in Bishop score were significantly increased in the IMN group. Pertaining to drug-related maternal side effect outcomes, the pooled analysis showed that the rates of headache, palpitations, nausea and flushing were significantly lower in the IMN group. Pertaining to neonatal outcomes, the pooled analysis showed no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the rates of neonatal intensive care unit admission, neonatal death, fetal distress, meconium-stained water, Apgar score < 7 at 1 and 5 min, and mean Apgar score at 1 and 5 min. CONCLUSION: IMN correlated with several obstetric-related maternal outcomes. IMN was not associated with adverse neonatal outcomes, but was associated with substantial drug-related maternal side effects.

Labour induction for termination of pregnancy with severe fetal anomalies after 24 weeks' gestation: a case series and systematic review of the literature.

PURPOSE: Under some circumstances, individuals choose to undergo pregnancy termination for foetal anomalies in the second half of pregnancy. This report provides objective information on the clinical management of such cases and a systematic review of the literature on labour induction outcomes for third-trimester abortion using mifepristone-misoprostol. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study is a case series describing outcomes for labour induction abortion for foetal anomalies, at gestational age 24 weeks and beyond. A systematic review was performed, searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Two independent authors reviewed and quality assessed the data from the articles. RESULTS: During a two-year period, 15 patients met inclusion criteria. Fourteen patients received mifepristone and misoprostol, and one received oxytocin. All delivered vaginally. Thirteen patients delivered within 24 hours of the first misoprostol dose, and half delivered within 12 hours. The average interval from misoprostol initiation to foetal expulsion was 15.5 hours in our series. The systematic review identified nine articles for inclusion, all retrospective studies. Labour induction protocols for mifepristone-misoprostol, reporting of gestational age, and key comparisons varied greatly. CONCLUSIONS: The case series illustrates successful termination of pregnancy primarily using combined mifepristone-misoprostol. Certainty of current evidence is low, based on the GRADE framework. Future research is necessary on third-trimester outcomes with mifepristone-misoprostol.

Effect of dexamethasone on labour induction and cervical ripening in term pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This study assessed the effect of dexamethasone on labour induction, Bishop Score, mean intervals from induction of labour to the active phase and delivery, duration of first and second stages of labour and caesarean section frequency. A search was carried out in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar and Persian databases. The quality of studies was evaluated using Cochrane handbook and the meta-analysis was conducted in RevMan 5.3. The heterogeneity of the studies was assessed using I2, T2 and Chi2. Subgroup analysis was used based on the routes of drug administration. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. 10 studies were included. The results showed significant differences between dexamethasone and control groups in terms of the mean interval from induction of labour to the active phase (MD = -1.55), Bishop score (MD = 2.40), duration of second stage of labour (MD = -8.61) and interval from induction of labour to delivery (MD = -2.83). There were no significant differences in duration of first stage of labour (MD= -0.69) and caesarean section frequency (RR = 1.09). Dexamethasone reduces the time interval between induction and delivery and also accelerates labour through cervical ripening and Bishop Score improvements.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Labour induction is a common obstetrics procedure. The desirable condition of the cervix, measured by the Bishop score, is a key to the successful induction. Several mechanical and biomechanical methods are used to achieve desirable cervical ripeness. The role of corticosteroids in the delivery process has not been well demonstrated.What do the results of this study add? The meta-analysis results showed significant differences between dexamethasone and control groups in terms of the mean interval from induction of labour to the active phase.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or future research? According to the evidences, dexamethasone can be used to reduce the interval between induction to active phase.

Comparison of transvaginal sonographic cervical length measurement and Bishop score for predicting labour induction outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Induction of labour (IOL) is of increasing prevalence worldwide and reliable prediction of its successful outcome is important. Traditional clinical methods for predicting successful IOL outcomes have been supplemented with newer technologies. The aim of this study was to compare transvaginal sonographic (TVS) cervical length measurement with Bishop score in predicting labour induction outcomes. METHODS: This study included pregnant women with term pregnancy, indication for IOL and unfavourable cervix (Bishop score >6) who had TVS performed prior to IOL. Exclusion critetia were regular contractions, ruptured membranes, non-cephalic presentation, uterine scar and pregnancy complications potentially influencing study outcomes. Outcomes measured were successful IOL defined as achievement of active phase of labour and vaginal delivery. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. Statistical significance was defined as p<0.05. RESULTS: Among 112 studied participants, IOL was successful in 101 (90.2%) pregnant women. AUC for Bishop score >2 was 0.831 (95% CI, 0.744-0.917, p<0.001) and for cervical length <30 mm 0.679 (95% CI 0.514-0.844, p<0.052). A total of 81 (72.3%) pregnant women delivered vaginally; AUC for Bishop score >2 was 0.754 (95% CI 0.648-0.861, p<0.001) and for cervical length <30 mm 0.602 (95% CI 0.484-0.720, p=0.092) which was the only insignificant predictor. CONCLUSIONS: Bishop score >2 is a better predictor for both successful IOL and vaginal delivery among induced women with term pregnancy and unfavourable cervix compared to cervical length <30 mm.

Titrated oral misoprostol versus static regimen of oral misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of titrated oral misoprostol versus static oral misoprostol for labour induction. We searched for the available randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, ISI web of science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We included RCTs compared titrated oral misoprostol versus static regimen of oral misoprostol during labour induction. Our main outcomes were vaginal and caesarean delivery rates, uterine tachysystole, misoprostol side effects, and neonatal adverse events. Three RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total number of 360 patients. The vaginal delivery rate did not significantly differ between both groups (p = 0.49). Titrated oral misoprostol was associated with significant increase in the caesarean delivery rate compared to static oral misoprostol (p = 0.04). Moreover, titrated oral misoprostol led to significant increase in the uterine tachysystole and misoprostol side effects (p = 0.01 & p = 0.003, respectively). There were no differences among both groups regarding different neonatal adverse events. In conclusion, titrated oral misoprostol increases the incidence of caesarean delivery, uterine tachysystole, and misoprostol side effects with a similar vaginal delivery rate compared to static dose misoprostol. Thus, static oral misoprostol should be used instead of titrated oral misoprostol during labour induction. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Different studies have evaluated titrated oral misoprostol administration for induction of labour and proved their efficacy in comparison with other induction methods. However, there is controversy among the published studies between titrated oral misoprostol and static oral misoprostol during induction of labour. A recent study concluded that hourly titrated misoprostol and static oral misoprostol are equally safe and effective when utilised for induction of labour with no fear of any adverse events. However, another study recommended static oral misoprostol administration for labour induction as it was linked to a lower caesarean section incidence, fewer drug side effects, and decline in complication rates in comparison with titrated oral misoprostol.What the results of this study add? Titrated oral misoprostol increases the incidence of caesarean delivery, uterine tachysystole, and misoprostol side effects with a similar vaginal delivery rate compared to static dose misoprostol.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Static oral misoprostol should be used instead of titrated oral misoprostol during labour induction. More future trials are required to confirm our findings.

Induction of labour in low-risk pregnancies before 40 weeks of gestation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

This systematic review of 16 randomized trials, which included 8796 pregnancies, did not demonstrate a reduction in caesarean births or perinatal morbidity from induction of labour (IoL) at 39-40 weeks for non-medical indications. However, IoL at 39-40 weeks may be associated with a lower incidence of maternal hypertensive disorders, a shorter duration of the first stage of labour, fewer instances of meconium-stained amniotic fluid, lower mean birth weights, longer duration of (maternal) hospitalization, and higher epidural usage. Until regional data on clinical benefits, resource implications and long-term impact are available, a prudent approach would be to encourage shared decision-making, wherein birthing persons with low-risk pregnancies are given the opportunity to assess the risks and benefits of IoL at 39-40 weeks over expectant management and allowed to consider their decision in the light of their values and preferences and local resource availability.

Optimal timing of labour induction in contemporary clinical practice.

Induction of labour (IoL) is generally conducted when maternal and foetal risks of remaining pregnant outweigh the risks of delivery. With emerging literature around non-medically indicated IoL, contemporary clinical practice has seen an increase in IoL at 39 weeks' gestation. This review highlights recent evidence on the most common indications for IoL including gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, and post-term pregnancies. It also summarizes the evidence related to the timing of IoL for other common conditions based on recent literature reviews.