Induction of labour at term with oral misoprostol versus a Foley catheter (PROBAAT-II): a multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Labour is induced in 20-30% of all pregnancies. In women with an unfavourable cervix, both oral misoprostol and Foley catheter are equally effective compared with dinoprostone in establishing vaginal birth, but each has a better safety profile. We did a trial to directly compare oral misoprostol with Foley catheter alone. METHODS: We did an open-label randomised non-inferiority trial in 29 hospitals in the Netherlands. Women with a term singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation, an unfavourable cervix, intact membranes, and without a previous caesarean section who were scheduled for induction of labour were randomly allocated to cervical ripening with 50 µg oral misoprostol once every 4 h or to a 30 mL transcervical Foley catheter. The primary outcome was a composite of asphyxia (pH ≤7·05 or 5-min Apgar score <7) or post-partum haemorrhage (≥1000 mL). The non-inferiority margin was 5%. The trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR3466. FINDINGS: Between July, 2012, and October, 2013, we randomly assigned 932 women to oral misoprostol and 927 women to Foley catheter. The composite primary outcome occurred in 113 (12·2%) of 924 participants in the misoprostol group versus 106 (11·5%) of 921 in the Foley catheter group (adjusted relative risk 1·06, 90% CI 0·86-1·31). Caesarean section occurred in 155 (16·8%) women versus 185 (20·1%; relative risk 0·84, 95% CI 0·69-1·02, p=0·067). 27 adverse events were reported in the misoprostol group versus 25 in the Foley catheter group. None were directly related to the study procedure. INTERPRETATION: In women with an unfavourable cervix at term, induction of labour with oral misoprostol and Foley catheter has similar safety and effectiveness. FUNDING: FondsNutsOhra.

Women's Experiences with and Preference for Induction of Labor with Oral Misoprostol or Foley Catheter at Term.

Objective We assessed experience and preferences among term women undergoing induction of labor with oral misoprostol or Foley catheter. Study Design In 18 of the 29 participating hospitals in the PROBAAT-II trial, women were asked to complete a questionnaire within 24 hours after delivery. We adapted a validated questionnaire about expectancy and experience of labor and asked women whether they would prefer the same method again in a future pregnancy. Results The questionnaire was completed by 502 (72%) of 695 eligible women; 273 (54%) had been randomly allocated to oral misoprostol and 229 (46%) to Foley catheter. Experience of the duration of labor, pain during labor, general satisfaction with labor, and feelings of control and fear related to their expectation were comparable between both the groups. In the oral misoprostol group, 6% of the women would prefer the other method if induction is necessary in future pregnancy, versus 12% in the Foley catheter group (risk ratio: 0.70; 95% confidence interval: 0.55-0.90; p = 0.02). Conclusion Women's experiences of labor after induction with oral misoprostol or Foley catheter are comparable. However, women in the Foley catheter group prefer more often to choose a different method for future inductions.

Incidence and recurrence rate of placental abruption: a longitudinal linked national cohort study in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: Women who have experienced a placental abruption have a risk of recurrence, but exact information to quantify this risk is currently not available. We studied the incidence and recurrence rate of placental abruption in a subsequent pregnancy and the influence of hypertensive disorders. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective national cohort study of all singleton pregnancies that ended from 1999-2007 in the Netherlands. A longitudinal linked national cohort of these women with information on a subsequent singleton delivery was used. We calculated and compared incidence and recurrence rates of placental abruption for women in total, stratified by gestational age of first placental abruption and by the presence of a hypertensive disorder in their first pregnancy. RESULTS: We studied 1,570,635 women of which 3496 (0.22%) experienced a placental abruption. Information was available on a subsequent singleton delivery for 264,424 deliveries. Of these, 521 women (0.20%) had a placental abruption in the first pregnancy vs 214 women (0.08%) in the second pregnancy. The risk of placental abruption in a subsequent pregnancy was significantly higher in women with a previous placental abruption compared with women without (5.8% vs 0.06%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 62-139). Women with a placental abruption that occurred at term in their first pregnancy were more at risk for recurrence (aOR, 188; 95% CI, 116-306) than women with a preterm (aOR, 52; 95% CI, 25-111) or early preterm (<32 weeks of gestation) placental abruption in their first pregnancy (aOR, 39; 95% CI, 13-116). Placental abruption was more frequent among women with a hypertensive disorder compared with normotensive women (0.44% vs 0.16%; odds ratio, 2.7; 95% CI, 2.3-3.3). Women with a hypertensive disorder were less at risk for recurrence than were normotensive women (aOR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.27-1.6). No interaction between a hypertensive disorder in the first pregnancy and the recurrence risk was found. CONCLUSION: Women with a placental abruption in their first pregnancy have a greatly increased risk of placental abruption in a subsequent pregnancy. Hypertensive disorders increase the risk of placental abruption but do not increase the recurrence rate in a subsequent pregnancy. We suggest elective induction from 37 weeks of gestation for women with a history of placental abruption at term in a previous pregnancy.

Prediction of postpartum hemorrhage in women with gestational hypertension or mild preeclampsia at term.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether postpartum hemorrhage can be predicted in women with gestational hypertension or mild preeclampsia at term. DESIGN: A cohort study in which we used data from our multicentre randomized controlled trial (HYPITAT trial). SETTING: The study was conducted in 38 hospitals in the Netherlands between 2005 and 2008. POPULATION: Women with gestational hypertension or mild preeclampsia at term (n = 1132). METHODS: An antepartum model (model A) and an antepartum/intrapartum model (model B) were created using logistic regression. The predictive capacity of the models was assessed with receiver operating characteristic analysis and calibration. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Postpartum hemorrhage, defined as blood loss >1000 mL within 24 h after delivery. RESULTS: Postpartum hemorrhage occurred in 118 (10.4%) women. Maternal age (odds ratio 1.03), prepregnancy body mass index (odds ratio 0.96), and women with preeclampsia (odds ratio 1.5) were independent antepartum prognostic variables of postpartum hemorrhage. Intrapartum variables incorporated in the model were gestational age at delivery (odds ratio 1.2), duration of dilatation stage (odds ratio 1.1), and episiotomy (odds ratio 1.5). Model A and model B showed moderate discrimination, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.59 (95% confidence interval 0.53-0.64) and 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.59-0.70), respectively. Calibration was moderate for model A (Hosmer-Lemeshow p = 0.26) but better for model B (Hosmer-Lemeshow p = 0.36). The rates of postpartum hemorrhage ranged from 4% (lowest 10%) to 22% (highest 10%). CONCLUSION: In the assessment of performance of a prediction model, calibration is more important than discriminative capacity. Our prediction model shows that for women with gestational hypertension or mild preeclampsia at term, distinction between low and high risk of developing postpartum hemorrhage is possible when antepartum and intrapartum variables are combined.

Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term (PROBAAT trial): an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Induction of labour is a common obstetric procedure. Both mechanical (eg, Foley catheters) and pharmacological methods (eg, prostaglandins) are used for induction of labour in women with an unfavourable cervix. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of induction of labour with a Foley catheter with induction with vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial in 12 hospitals in the Netherlands between Feb 10, 2009, and May 17, 2010. We enrolled women with a term singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation, intact membranes, an unfavourable cervix, an indication for induction of labour, and no prior caesarean section. Participants were randomly allocated by an online randomisation system to induction of labour with a 30 mL Foley catheter or vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel (1:1 ratio). Because of the nature of the intervention this study was not blinded. The primary outcome was caesarean section rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time from intervention to birth. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. We also did a meta-analysis that included our trial. The trial was registered with the Dutch trial registry, number NTR 1646. FINDINGS: 824 women were allocated to induction of labour with a Foley catheter (n=412) or vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel (n=412). Caesarean section rates were much the same between the two groups (23%vs 20%, risk ratio [RR] 1·13, 95% CI 0·87-1·47). A meta-analysis including our trial data confirmed that a Foley catheter did not reduce caesarean section rates. We recorded two serious maternal adverse events, both in the prostaglandin group: one uterine perforation and one uterine rupture. INTERPRETATION: In women with an unfavourable cervix at term, induction of labour with a Foley catheter is similar to induction of labour with prostaglandin E2 gel, with fewer maternal and neonatal side-effects. FUNDING: None.

Pessary placement in the prevention of preterm birth in multiple pregnancies: a propensity score analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In asymptomatic women with a multiple pregnancy and short cervix prophylactic use of a cervical pessary might reduce preterm birth. We assessed the possible treatment effects of pessary use in pregnancy duration and for poor perinatal outcome. STUDY DESIGN: This cohort study was performed between December 2012 and September 2014 in 44 hospitals in the Netherlands. Women with multiple pregnancy had a cervical length measurement between 16 and 22 weeks of gestation. When cervical length was below 38 mm, women were offered a cervical pessary. The course of pregnancy, including perinatal outcome in these women was compared to the outcome of women from the placebo group of the AMPHIA trial (ISRCTN40512715) (historical cohort). Propensity-score matching with replacement was used to create comparable baseline characteristics between both populations. RESULTS: We studied 63 women in the pessary group and 56 women as controls. Propensity-score matching generated 57 women in the intervention group matched to 57 women (31 unique) in the control group. Gestational age at delivery was comparable between both groups (HR 0.96, 95%-CI 0.46-1.46) as well as their delivery rates before 28, 32 and 37 weeks, RR 0.68 (95%-CI 0.21-2.18), RR 0.54 (95%-CI 0.21-1.41), and RR 1.22 (95%-CI 0.47-3.15), respectively. There was no difference in composite perinatal outcome (RR 1.36, 95%-CI 0.53-3.51) and perinatal mortality (RR 0.89, 95%-CI 0.24-3.38) either. CONCLUSION: In this cohort study with propensity score analysis, pessary use did not prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic women with a multiple pregnancy and short cervix.

Foley catheter or prostaglandin E2 inserts for induction of labour at term: an open-label randomized controlled trial (PROBAAT-P trial) and systematic review of literature.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of a transcervical Foley catheter compared to vaginal prostaglandin E2 inserts for term induction of labour. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial in five hospitals in the Netherlands. Women with a singleton term pregnancy in cephalic presentation, intact membranes, unfavourable cervix, and no prior caesarean section were enrolled. Participants were randomly allocated by a web-based randomization system to induction of labour with a 30 ml Foley catheter or 10mg slow-release vaginal prostaglandin E2 inserts in a 1:1 ratio. Due to the nature of the intervention this study was not blinded. The primary outcome was the caesarean section rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time from intervention to birth. Additionally, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of similar studies. RESULTS: We analyzed 226 women: 107 received a Foley catheter and 119 inserts. Caesarean section rates were comparable (20% versus 22%, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.54-1.50). Secondary outcomes showed no differences. We observed no serious maternal or neonatal morbidity. Meta-analysis showed comparable caesarean section rates, but significantly fewer cases of hyperstimulation during the ripening phase when a Foley catheter was used. CONCLUSIONS: We found, in this relatively small study, no differences in effectiveness and safety of induction of labour with a Foley catheter and 10mg slow release vaginal prostaglandin E2 inserts. Meta-analysis confirmed a comparable caesarean section rate, and showed fewer cases of hyperstimulation when a Foley catheter was used.

[The many manifestations of Behçet's disease]. / De vele uitingen van de ziekte van Behçet.

A 19-year-old woman with a Syrian background complained of genital ulcers. Sexually transmitted disease was excluded. She was also suffering from oral aphthae and had been treated by a dermatologist for acne. The diagnosis of Behçet disease was made primarily on clinical grounds. Pathological examination of skin biopsies confirmed the diagnosis. The patient was successfully treated with corticosteroids. Behçet's disease is a chronic autoimmune vasculitis, often characterized by oral ulcers. The symptoms are often non-specific and the disease has exacerbations and remissions. This often makes its diagnosis difficult. Its exact cause is unknown but the immune system and genetic factors may play a role. Although diagnosis is made mainly on clinical grounds, laboratory tests and pathology examination may contribute to the establishment of the differential diagnosis.

Severe complication after termination of a second trimester cervical pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To report a supracervical hysterectomy performed after a life-threatening hemorrhage due to an attempted surgical termination at a gestational age of 18 weeks, which appeared to be a cervical pregnancy. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: Teaching hospital. PATIENT(S): A 36-year-old pregnant woman, with two previous cesarean sections. INTERVENTION(S): Supracervical hysterectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Not applicable. RESULT(S): A stable patient. CONCLUSION(S): By missing a cervical pregnancy in the second trimester, a life-threatening hemorrhage occurred after an attempted surgical termination. In case of failure of the conservative therapy this rare diagnosis should be considered. A supracervical hysterectomy at this gestational age is the only therapeutic option.

Womens' preference in Down syndrome screening.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the knowledge of pregnant women about prenatal tests, and what tests they would choose if offered. Also, the preference of pregnant women for second-trimester or first-trimester screening was assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Pregnant women receiving antenatal care in a decentralized primary care system (n=80), and pregnant women that were offered a prenatal diagnosis at the Academic Medical Centre (n=195), were asked to complete a questionnaire. RESULTS: The response rate was over 80%. Most women in both groups preferred a screening test for Down syndrome to be performed in the first trimester of pregnancy. A combination of nuchal translucency measurement and first-trimester serum screening was the option of choice. The screening possibilities for Down syndrome were less well known to the women in the low-risk group compared with the women in the high-risk group. The offer of a prenatal screening test would have been declined by more than 30% of women at low risk for carrying a fetus with Down syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that women prefer screening for Down syndrome to be performed in the first trimester of pregnancy, using both serum and ultrasound tests. In women at low risk for Down syndrome the knowledge of prenatal screening methods was less, as well as the acceptance of prenatal screening being lower.