Increased pain relief with remifentanil does not improve the success rate of external cephalic version: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to compare the effect of two pain relief methods (remifentanil vs. nitrous oxide) on the success rate of external cephalic version. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a randomized open label parallel-group controlled single-center clinical trial with sequential design, at Cruces University Hospital, Spain. Singleton pregnancies in noncephalic presentation at term that were referred for external cephalic version were assigned according to a balanced (1:1) restricted randomization scheme to analgesic treatment with remifentanil or nitrous oxide during the procedure. The primary endpoint was external cephalic version success rate. Secondary endpoints were adverse event rate, degree of pain, cesarean rate and perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: The trial was stopped early after the second interim analysis due to a very low likelihood of finding substantial differences in efficacy (futility). The external cephalic version success rate was the same in the two arms (31/60, 51.7%) with 120 women recruited, 60 in each arm. The mean pain score was significantly lower in the remifentanil group (3.2 ± 2.4 vs. 6.0 ± 2.3; p < 0.01). No differences were found in external cephalic version-related complications. There was a trend toward a higher frequency of adverse effects in the remifentanil group (18.3% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.10), with a significantly higher incidence rate (21.7 events/100 women vs. 6.7 events/100 women with nitrous oxide, p = 0.03). All reported adverse events were mild and reversible. CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil for analgesia decreased external cephalic version-related pain but did not increase the success rate of external cephalic version at term and appeared to be associated with an increased frequency of mild adverse effects.

Effect of maternal intravenous fluid therapy on external cephalic version at term: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to analyze whether maternal intravenous fluid therapy prior to external cephalic version (ECV) increases the amount of amniotic fluid and the success rate of the procedure. STUDY DESIGN: This was a prospective single-center cohort study of 200 women with a consecutive cohort of 100 pregnant women with a breech presentation at term who were administered intravenous fluid therapy with 2 L of hypotonic saline before the version attempt, compared to a control cohort of 100 pregnant women not given hydration treatment. RESULTS: The mean increase in the amniotic fluid index (AFI) after intravenous maternal hydration was 3.75 ± 2.71 cm. The amount of fluid before hydration was the only variable found to be associated with increases in amniotic fluid levels, both in absolute and relative terms (odds ratio, -0.21; 95% confidence interval, -0.37 to -0.05 and odds ratio, -4.62; 95% confidence interval, -6.17 to -3.06; P < .01, respectively). We did not observe any severe complications secondary to the intravenous fluid therapy. The ECV success rate was 43% in the study group compared to 47% in the control group (P = .67). The success rate was significantly lower the larger the relative increase in the AFI, although no correlation was found in absolute terms (χ(2) for linear trend = 0.03 and 0.34, respectively). CONCLUSION: Maternal intravenous fluid therapy with 2 L of hypotonic saline prior to ECV is an effective and safe technique for increasing the AFI. However, its use in ECV does not increase the success rate of the procedure.

Induction at 41 weeks increases the risk of caesarean section in a hospital with a low rate of caesarean sections.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the impact of a change in the management of prolonged pregnancies from inducing labour at 42(+0) to induction at 41(0-6). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Analysis of 3563 single pregnancies with cephalic presentation of ≥ 41 weeks of gestation delivered in Cruces University Hospital (Spain). Two cohorts were compared corresponding to before and after the change in the policy on induction. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Induction rate, vaginal delivery rate, newborn morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The overall rate of caesarean sections in the patients included in the study was 12.8% (19.5% among those induced and 8.4% among those in whom the onset of labour has been spontaneous). The caesarean section rate in cohorts 41(0-6) and 42(+0) were 14.1% and 11.4%, respectively (p=0.01). Though there were more newborns with umbilical cord blood ph<7.10 in cohort 41(0-6) than in the other group (8.7% versus 4.5%; p<0.01), no significant differences were found between cohorts in 5-min Apgar score < 7, number of admissions to the neonatal care unit or perinatal mortality. CONCLUSION: The induction of labour during week 41 in prolonged pregnancies may increase the rate of caesarean sections in hospitals with low rates of caesarean sections.

Oxytocin versus dinoprostone vaginal insert for induction of labor after previous cesarean section: a retrospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of two methods for induction of labor after previous cesarean section. METHODS: To compare 247 women with a previous cesarean section who were induced with a dinoprostone vaginal insert and 279 women with a previous cesarean section induced with oxytocin, between 2001 and 2008. We evaluated vaginal delivery rate, maternal morbidity and newborn morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: The overall rate of vaginal delivery was 65.2%. We did not find significant differences between induction with dinoprostone vaginal insert and oxytocin in the rate of cesarean section performed (35.6% vs. 34.1%, P=0.71). There were nine cases of uterine rupture (rate of 1.7%), of which four occurred with dinoprostone vaginal insert and five when using oxytocin (P=0.89). We found no significant differences in neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Both tested methods appear to be equally safe and effective for induction of labor in women with a previous cesarean section.

Atosiban vs. ritodrine as a tocolytic in external cephalic version at term: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) at term using ritodrine or atosiban as a tocolytic agent. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with a sample of 236 pregnant women with a breech presentation at term, from November 2006 to March 2008. Data have been analyzed from the moment the cephalic version is performed until the time of delivery. RESULTS: ECV success rate using ritodrine as a tocolytic agent was 56.8% compared to 31.4% with atosiban. Ritodrine increases the version success potential more significantly than atosiban (P<0.05). In both cases, the use of ECV reduced the rate of cesarean sections, although a higher number of versions are required with atosiban [numbers needed to treat (NNT)=9.08] to avoid a cesarean section compared to ritodrine (NNT=3.41). CONCLUSIONS: Ritodrine seems better than atosiban as tocolytic agent for ECVs.