Which method is best for the induction of labour? A systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

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.

Comparative study of second-line labor induction methods in patients with unfavorable cervix after first-line low-dose oral misoprostol

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to evaluate low-dose oral misoprostol induction, and compare different methods used in second-line induction in patients with a Bishop score less than 6.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed the medical history and courses of pregnancy of all patients induced with first-line of low-dose oral misoprostol (50 μg every 4 h with a total of 200 μg/24 h) from April 2021 to June 2022 in a university hospital center, and reported outcomes according to the second-line method of induction.

RESULTS

Among 437 labor inductions with low-dose oral misoprostol, 120 patients required a second-line induction. Predictive factors of first-line failure were higher body mass index (P = 0.011), absence of premature rupture of membranes (P = 0.021) and earlier term of pregnancy (P < 0.001). Regarding second methods of induction of labor, time from induction to delivery was shorter in the oxytocin group than the dinoprostone and misoprostol groups (24.0 vs. 41 and 51.0 h, respectively; P < 0.001), and was also significantly shorter in the dinoprostone than the misoprostol group (P = 0.048). Cesarean section rates did not differ between the three groups (P = 0.651). There were no clinically significant differences in adverse events between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Normal body mass index, previous rupture of membranes and later term of induction of labor were the three favoring success factors during first-line oral misoprostol. In cases of a Bishop score <6, oxytocin may be the best option to reduce duration to delivery, with the same maternal-fetal outcomes, including a similar rate of vaginal delivery.

[Prostaglandins or cervical balloon for the induction of labor for cervical ripening: A literature review]

OBJECTIVE

Induction of labor in France concerns one birth out of four with 70% of induction starting by cervical ripening, either with a pharmacological (prostaglandins) or a mechanical (balloon) method. This review aims to compare these two methods within current knowledge, using the PRISMA methodology.

METHODS

Trials comparing these two methods, published or unpublished up to July 2023, in French or English were searched for in the PubMed, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrial.govs datasets. Fifty articles including 10,689 women were selected. The outcomes of interest were those from the Core Outcome Set for trails on Induction of Labour (COSIOL) list: mode of delivery, time from induction-to-birth, maternal and neonatal morbidity, and maternal satisfaction.

RESULT

No differences were observed between the two methods for the mode of delivery or neonatal and maternal morbidity. The time from induction-to-birth was longer for mechanical methods. Those were also associated with a greater need for oxytocin, less uterine hyperstimulation and less instrumental deliveries. Maternal satisfaction was assessed in only nine trials using various scales which made the interpretation of maternal satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of these two induction methods is similar for vaginal delivery, but it remains to be seen which one best meets women's satisfaction criteria.

Methods for the induction of labor: efficacy and safety

This review assessed the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic agents (prostaglandins, oxytocin, mifepristone, hyaluronidase, and nitric oxide donors) and mechanical methods (single- and double-balloon catheters, laminaria, membrane stripping, and amniotomy) and those generally considered under the rubric of complementary medicine (castor oil, nipple stimulation, sexual intercourse, herbal medicine, and acupuncture). A substantial body of published reports, including 2 large network meta-analyses, support the safety and efficacy of misoprostol (PGE1) when used for cervical ripening and labor induction. Misoprostol administered vaginally at doses of 50 μg has the highest probability of achieving vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Regardless of dosing, route, and schedule of administration, when used for cervical ripening and labor induction, prostaglandin E2 seems to have similar efficacy in decreasing cesarean delivery rates. Globally, although oxytocin represents the most widely used pharmacologic agent for labor induction, its effectiveness is highly dependent on parity and cervical status. Oxytocin is more effective than expectant management in inducing labor, and the efficacy of oxytocin is enhanced when combined with amniotomy. However, prostaglandins administered vaginally or intracervically are more effective in inducing labor than oxytocin. A single 200-mg oral tablet of mifepristone seems to represent the lowest effective dose for cervical ripening. The bulk of the literature assessing relaxin suggests this agent has limited benefit when used for this indication. Although intracervical injection of hyaluronidase may cause cervical ripening, the need for intracervical administration has limited the use of this agent. Concerning the vaginal administration of nitric oxide donors, including isosorbide mononitrate, isosorbide, nitroglycerin, and sodium nitroprusside, the higher incidence of side effects with these agents has limited their use. A synthetic hygroscopic cervical dilator has been found to be effective for preinduction cervical ripening. Although a pharmacologic agent may be administered after the use of the synthetic hygroscopic dilator, in an attempt to reduce the interval to vaginal delivery, concomitant use of mechanical and pharmacologic methods is being explored. Combining the use of a single-balloon catheter with dinoprostone, misoprostol, or oxytocin enhances the efficacy of these pharmacologic agents in cervical ripening and labor induction. The efficacy of single- and double-balloon catheters in cervical ripening and labor induction seems similar. To date, the combination of misoprostol with an intracervical catheter seems to be the best approach when balancing delivery times with safety. Although complementary methods are occasionally used by patients, given the lack of data documenting their efficacy and safety, these methods are rarely used in hospital settings.

Outpatient cervical ripening with balloon catheters: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

One in four labors are induced. The process of cervical ripening can be lengthy and pre-labor hospitalization is required. Outpatient cervical ripening can be an attractive alternative.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of outpatient cervical ripening with a balloon catheter compared with inpatient balloon catheter or prostaglandin E2 (PGE2 ).

SEARCH STRATEGY

The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception to October 15, 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing the outpatient balloon catheter with inpatient balloon catheter or inpatient PGE2 for term cervical ripening.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was the cesarean delivery rate. The secondary outcomes included instrumental delivery, the time from intervention-to-birth, oxytocin augmentation, total hospital duration, and maternal/neonatal adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-nine randomized controlled trials with a total of 6004 participants were identified. No difference in the cesarean delivery rate was revealed among the three interventions. Compared with inpatient balloon catheter, outpatient balloon catheter had shorter total hospital duration (mean difference -8.58, 95% confidence interval -17.02 to -1.10). No differences were revealed in the time from intervention-to-birth, instrumental delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, 5-min Apgar score less than 7, umbilical cord arterial pH less than 7.1, and neonatal intensive care unit admission among the three interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient balloon catheter in low-risk term pregnancies is an available option that could be considered for cervical ripening. The safety and effectiveness are comparable to inpatient cervical ripening methods.

Twice-Weekly Versus Once-Weekly Membrane Sweeping in the Prevention of Post-Term Pregnancy: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Membrane sweeping is considered a simple and effective method for initiating spontaneous onset of labor. Despite the widely accepted membrane sweeping use to prevent post-term birth, the optimal frequency has not been estimated. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of twice-weekly versus once-weekly membrane sweeping in post-term pregnancy prevention. Four different databases were searched for available clinical trials from inception to October 2022. We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared twice-weekly membrane sweeping in intervention group versus once-weekly membrane sweeping in control group among pregnant women with singleton pregnancy at ≥ 39 gestational weeks. Our primary outcomes were the rate of spontaneous onset of labor and the requirement for formal methods of labor induction. Our secondary outcomes were sweeping to delivery interval in days, gestational age at delivery in weeks, Bishop score at admission, chorioamnionitis, and premature rupture of membranes. Three RCTs (596 patients) were included. Twice-weekly membrane sweeping was associated with significant increase in the rate of spontaneous onset of labor and significant decline in labor induction rate in comparison with once-weekly group. Duration from sweeping to delivery was significantly shorter among the twice-weekly group (p<0.001). Furthermore, gestational age at delivery was significantly earlier in the twice-weekly group. A significantly higher Bishop score at admission was observed in the twice-weekly group (p=0.02). There were no significant differences across both groups in chorioamnionitis and premature rupture of membranes. In conclusion, twice-weekly membrane sweeping is more effective in preventing post-maturity pregnancy than once-weekly sweeping without added adverse events.

Oxytocin Versus Oral Misoprostol for Induction of Labor in Pregnant Women with Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: a Randomized Clinical Trial

This study compares the effectiveness and safety of oxytocin infusion against oral misoprostol for inducing labour in pregnant women with term prelabor membrane rupture. We randomized 173 pregnant women presenting with term prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) at Ain Shams University Maternity Hospital into Group A (underwent induction of labor (IOL) by 25μg misoprostol oral tablet every 4 h, for maximum 5 doses) and an identical Group B: (underwent IOL by oxytocin infusion according to the hospital protocol). Our primary outcome was rate of vaginal delivery within 24 h, while the secondary outcomes included the time till active phase, induction to delivery interval, maternal pyrexia, nausea and vomiting, fetal distress, Apgar score, birth weight, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. Both groups showed high rates of vaginal delivery (82.4% & 87.1% for misoprostol group and oxytocin group respectively) with no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.394). However, patients induced by misoprostol took significantly less time to reach active phase with a shorter induction to delivery interval as compared to patients induced with oxytocin. This difference was clear in multiparous women, but not observed in primiparous women when subgroup analysis was done. No significant difference was found as regards other outcomes. Our study showed that both oral misoprostol and oxytocin are effective and safe for IOL in patients with PROM, with shorter induction-delivery interval in patients induced by oral misoprostol, an effect that is clear in multiparous but not primiparous women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05215873, on 31/01/2022, "retrospectively registered".

Diagnostic accuracy of pre-induction cervical elastography, volume, length, and uterocervical angle for the prediction of successful induction of labor with dinoprostone

PURPOSE

The study's aim is to define among a group of ultrasonographic cervical measurements a candidate parameter predictive of successful of induction of labor in term pregnancies with unfavorable cervix.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included 141 pregnant women at term with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score ≤ 6). All patients underwent clinical and ultrasonographic cervical evaluation before dinoprostone induction. Pre-induction cervical assessments included the Bishop score, cervical length, cervical volume, uterocervical angle, and cervical elastographic parameters. Vaginal delivery (VD) was accepted as successful dinoprostone induction. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify the potential risk factors significantly associated with CS while controlling for possible confounding variables.

RESULTS

The vaginal delivery rate was 74% (n = 93) and the cesarean section (CS) rate was 26% (n = 32). Sixteen patients who had a cesarean section due to fetal distress before the active phase of labor were excluded from the study. The mean induction-to-delivery interval was 1176.1 ± 352 (540-2150) for VD and 1359.4 ± 318.4 (780-2020) for CS (p = 0.01). Bishop score was lower in women with cesarean section (p = 0.002). When both groups were compared in terms of delivery type, no difference was found between cervical elastography values, cervical volume, cervical length, and uterocervical angle measurements. Multivariable logistic regression model failed to show significant differences between cervical elastography values, cervical volume, cervical length, and uterocervical angle measurements.

CONCLUSION

Cervical length, cervical elastography, cervical volume, and uterocervical angle measurements did not provide a clinically useful prediction of outcomes following labor induction in our study group with unfavorable cervix. Cervical length measurements significantly predicted the time interval from induction to delivery.

Introducing the participant-generated experience and satisfaction (PaGES) index: a novel, longitudinal mixed-methods evaluation tool

BACKGROUND

Patient-Reported Outcomes or Experience Measures (PROMS / PREMS) are routinely used in clinical studies to assess participants' views and experiences of trial interventions and related quality of life. Purely quantitative approaches lack the necessary detail and flexibility to understand the real-world impact of study interventions on participants, according to their own priorities. Conversely, purely qualitative assessments are time consuming and usually restricted to a small, possibly unrepresentative, sub-sample. This paper, which reports a pilot study within a randomised controlled trial of induction of labour, reports the feasibility, and acceptability of the Participant-Generated Experience and Satisfaction (PaGES) Index, a new mixed qualitative / quantitative PREM tool.

METHODS

The single-sheet PaGES Index was completed by hypertensive pregnant women in two hospitals in Nagpur, India before and after taking part in the 'Misoprostol or Oxytocin for Labour Induction' (MOLI) randomised controlled trial. Participants recorded aspects of the impending birth they considered most important, and then ranked them. After the birth, participants completed the PaGES Index again, this time also scoring their satisfaction with each item. Forms were completed on paper in the local language or in English, supported by Research Assistants. Following translation (when needed), responses were uploaded to a REDCap database, coded in Excel and analysed thematically. A formal qualitative evaluation (qMOLI) was also conducted to obtain stakeholder perspectives of the PaGES Index and the wider trial. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with participants, and focus groups with researchers and clinicians. Data were managed using NVivo 12 software and analysed using the framework approach.

RESULTS

Participants and researchers found the PaGES Index easy to complete and administer; mothers valued the opportunity to speak about their experience. Qualitative analysis of the initial 68 PaGES Index responses identified areas of commonality and difference among participants and also when comparing antenatal and postnatal responses. Theme citations and associated comments scores were fairly stable before and after the birth. The qMOLI phase, comprising 53 one-to-one interviews with participants and eight focus groups involving 83 researchers and clinicians, provided support that the PaGES Index was an acceptable and even helpful means of capturing participant perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjective participant experiences are an important aspect of clinical trials. The PaGES Index was found to be a feasible and acceptable measure that unites qualitative research's explanatory power with the comparative power of quantitative designs. It also offers the opportunity to conduct a before-and-after evaluation, allowing researchers to examine the expectations and actual experiences of all clinical trial participants, not just a small sub-sample. This study also shows that, with appropriate research assistant input, the PaGES Index can be used in different languages by participants with varying literacy levels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov (21/11/2018) (NCT03749902).

Women satisfaction on choosing the cervical ripening method: Oral misoprostol versus balloon catheter

Objective

Induction of labor concerns about 29 % of women in Unites States and 33 % in Europe. Among the various methods for cervical ripening, the efficacy and safety profiles of oral misoprostol and balloon catheter are comparable, but data in the literature on maternal satisfaction during induction of labor are few. The objective of this study was to assess the satisfaction of women who chose the method of cervical ripening, i.e. either balloon catheter or oral misoprostol, for induction of labor.

Study design

This retrospective study asked women who had undergone induction of labor between February 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021. After receiving verbal and written information, the choice of method between oral misoprostol and balloon catheter was left to the patient's free appreciation. Satisfaction was assessed by means of a questionnaire distributed to all women during their stay in the maternity unit. The principal assessment criterion was based on women' inclination to choose the same cervical ripening method if induction of labor were to prove necessary in a future pregnancy, and their willingness to recommend this method to a friend. Univariate analyses were conducted using Student's t-test, Chi-2 test or Fisher's exact test.

Results

On 575 women eligible for analysis, 365 (63.5 %) of these women replied to the satisfaction questionnaire. Of this number, 236 (64.7 %) chose cervical ripening by balloon catheter, and 129 (35.3 %) by oral misoprostol. No significant difference was found between the two groups: 68.2 % of women in the balloon catheter group would opt for the same method of cervical ripening if it proved necessary in a future pregnancy and 64.7% would recommend it to a pregnant friend, versus 65.9 % and 63.6 % in the oral misoprostol group, respectively. Women were overall pleased to be able to choose their method of cervical ripening: 90.5 % of patients in the balloon catheter group and 95.3 % in the oral misoprostol group.

Conclusions

When women choose the method of cervical ripening, satisfaction is overall good, irrespective of the method, whether by balloon catheter or misoprostol.

Predictors of vaginal delivery following balloon catheter for labor induction in women with one previous cesarean

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to estimate predictors for vaginal birth following balloon catheter induction of labor (IOL) in women with one previous cesarean section (CS) and an unfavorable cervix.

METHODS

This 4-year retrospective cohort study was conducted in Longhua District Central Hospital in Shenzhen China, between January 2015 and December 2018. Patients with one previous CS and a current singleton-term pregnancy who underwent balloon catheter cervical ripening and IOL were enrolled. Univariate analysis was used to identify predictive factors associated with vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC). Binary logistic regression was further used to identify which factors were independently associated with the outcome measure. The primary outcome was VBAC, which was a successful trial of labor after cesarean delivery (TOLAC) following IOL.

RESULTS

A total of 69.57% (208/299) of the women who planned for IOL had VBAC. In the final binary logistic regression equation, lower fetal weight (< 4000 g) (odds ratio [OR]5.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.09,13.27), lower body mass index (BMI,<30 kg/m²) (OR 2.27; CI 1.21, 4.26), Bishop score after cervical ripening > 6 (OR 1.94; CI 1.37, 2.76) remained independently associated with an increased chance of VBAC.

CONCLUSIONS

The influencing factors of VBAC following IOL were fetal weight, BMI, and Bishop score after cervical ripening. Adequate individualized management and assessment of the IOL may help improve the VBAC rate.

Efficacy of pharmacological and mechanical cervical priming methods for induction of labour and their applicability for outpatient management: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

A systematic review to determine the efficacy and safety of prostaglandins (PG) and Foley catheter (FC) for cervical priming in the outpatient setting. Various methods are available to achieve cervical ripening prior to induction of labour (IOL). In this systematic review, we will report the literature to date, and investigate the efficacy and safety of using the Foley catheter balloon or prostaglandins for cervical ripening, comparing both methods with each other, and discuss the implications of these findings for midwifery led units.

METHODS

English peer-reviewed journals were systematically searched in the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMCARE, EMBASE and CINAHL, for studies investigating cervical ripening using the FC or PGs. Additional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were identified by a manual search. Search terms included: cervix dilatation effacement, cervix ripening, outpatient, ambulatory care, obstetric patients, pharmacological preparations, and Foley catheter. Only RCTs of FC versus PG or either intervention versus placebo or intervention in the in-patient Vs. outpatient setting were included. 15 RCTs were included.

RESULTS

The results of this review show that both FC and PG analogues are equally effective cervical ripening agents. When compared to FC, PGs lead to a reduced requirement for oxytocin augmentation and a shorter intervention to delivery interval. However, PG use is also associated with an increased risk of hyperstimulation, cardiotocographic monitoring abnormalities and negative neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

FC cervical ripening is an effective method of outpatient cervical priming, which is safe, acceptable, and cost-effective and thus has a potential role in both resource-rich and resource-poor countries. With appropriate dosing, some PG analogues also appear to offer similar outcomes.

Mechanical methods for induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Mechanical methods were the first methods developed to ripen the cervix and induce labour. During recent decades they have been substituted by pharmacological methods. Potential advantages of mechanical methods, compared with pharmacological methods may include reduction in side effects that could improve neonatal outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2001, last updated in 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of mechanical methods for third trimester (> 24 weeks' gestation) induction of labour in comparison with prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) (vaginal and intracervical), low-dose misoprostol (oral and vaginal), amniotomy or oxytocin.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and reference lists of retrieved studies (9 January 2018). We updated the search in March 2019 and added the search results to the awaiting classification section of the review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Clinical trials comparing mechanical methods used for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction with pharmacological methods. Mechanical methods include: (1) the introduction of a catheter through the cervix into the extra-amniotic space with balloon insufflation; (2) introduction of laminaria tents, or their synthetic equivalent (Dilapan), into the cervical canal; (3) use of a catheter to inject fluid into the extra-amniotic space (EASI). This review includes the following comparisons: (1) specific mechanical methods (balloon catheter, laminaria tents or EASI) compared with prostaglandins (different types, different routes) or with oxytocin; (2) single balloon compared to a double balloon; (3) addition of prostaglandins or oxytocin to mechanical methods compared with prostaglandins or oxytocin alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed risk of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes a total of 112 trials, with 104 studies contributing data (22,055 women; 21 comparisons). Risk of bias of trials varied. Overall, the evidence was graded from very-low to moderate quality. All evidence was downgraded for lack of blinding and, for many comparisons, the effect estimates were too imprecise to make a valid judgement.   Balloon versus vaginal PGE2: there may be little or no difference in vaginal deliveries not achieved within 24 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.26; 7 studies; 1685 women; low-quality evidence) and there probably is little or no difference in caesarean sections (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09; 28 studies; 6619 women; moderate-quality evidence) between induction of labour with a balloon catheter and vaginal PGE2. A balloon catheter probably reduces the risk of uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate (FHR) changes (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.67; 6 studies; 1966 women; moderate-quality evidence), serious neonatal morbidity or perinatal death (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.93; 8 studies; 2757 women; moderate-quality evidence) and may slightly reduce the risk of aneonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04; 3647 women; 12 studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether there is a difference in serious maternal morbidity or death (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.12; 4 studies; 1481 women) or five-minute Apgar score < 7 (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.14; 4271 women; 14 studies) because the quality of the evidence was found to be very low and low, respectively. Balloon versus low-dose vaginal misoprostol: it is uncertain whether there is a difference in vaginal deliveries not achieved within 24 hours between induction of labour with a balloon catheter and vaginal misoprostol (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.39; 340 women; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). A balloon catheter probably reduces the risk of uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.85; 1322 women; 8 studies; moderate-quality evidence) but may increase the risk of a caesarean section (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.60; 1756 women; 12 studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether there is a difference in serious neonatal morbidity or perinatal death (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.66; 381 women; 3 studies), serious maternal morbidity or death (no events; 4 studies, 464 women), both very low-quality evidence, and five-minute Apgar score < 7 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.97; 941 women; 7 studies) and NICU admissions (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.63; 1302 women; 9 studies) both low-quality evidence. Balloon versus low-dose oral misoprostol: a balloon catheter probably increases the risk of a vaginal delivery not achieved within 24 hours (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.46; 782 women, 2 studies, and probably slightly increases the risk of a caesarean section (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32; 3178 women; 7 studies; both moderate-quality evidence) when compared to oral misoprostol. It is uncertain whether there is a difference in uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.38; 2033 women; 2 studies), serious neonatal morbidity or perinatal death (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.06; 2627 women; 3 studies), both low-quality evidence, serious maternal morbidity or death (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.52; 2627 women; 3 studies), very low-quality evidence, five-minute Apgar scores < 7 (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.32; 2693 women; 4 studies) and NICU admissions (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.17; 2873 women; 5 studies) both low-quality evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-quality evidence shows mechanical induction with a balloon is probably as effective as induction of labour with vaginal PGE2. However, a balloon seems to have a more favourable safety profile. More research on this comparison does not seem warranted. Moderate-quality evidence shows a balloon catheter may be slightly less effective as oral misoprostol, but it remains unclear if there is a difference in safety outcomes for the neonate. When compared to low-dose vaginal misoprostol, low-quality evidence shows a balloon may be less effective, but probably has a better safety profile. Future research could be focused more on safety aspects for the neonate and maternal satisfaction.

Early versus delayed amniotomy with immediate oxytocin after Foley catheter cervical ripening in multiparous women with labor induction: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate immediate oxytocin and early amniotomy compared with delayed amniotomy after Foley catheter cervical ripening in multiparous women on intervention-to-delivery interval.

METHODS

This randomized trial was conducted in Malaysia in 232 term multiparous women with balloon catheter-ripened cervixes (dilatation ≥3 cm), singleton fetus, cephalic presentation with intact membranes, and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing. They were randomized to immediate titrated intravenous oxytocin infusion and early amniotomy (116) or delayed amniotomy after 4 h of oxytocin (116). Primary outcome was intervention (oxytocin initiation)-to-delivery interval.

RESULTS

Oxytocin-to-delivery intervals were a median of 4.99 h (interquartile range [IQR], 3.21-7.82 h) versus 6.23 h (IQR, 4.50-8.45 h) (P < 0.001) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively. Delivery rate at 4 h and 6 h after oxytocin infusion were 40 of 116 (35%) versus 22 of 116 (19%) (relative risk [RR], 1.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-2.86], P = 0.011) and 77 of 116 (66%) versus 54 of 116 (47%) (RR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.13-1.80], P = 0.003) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively. Maternal satisfaction on birth process were 7 (IQR, 6-8) versus 7 (IQR, 7-8) (P = 0.006), uterine hyperstimulation rates were 10 of 116 (9%) versus 14 of 116 (12%) (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.33-1.54]) (P = 0.519), and Cesarean delivery rates were 17 of 116 (15%) versus 19 of 116 (16%) (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.49-1.63], P = 0.856) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In multiparas at term following cervical ripening by Foley catheter, immediate oxytocin and early amniotomy compared with a scheduled 4-h delay to amniotomy shortens the interval to birth and decreases uterine hyperactivity in labor but lowers maternal satisfaction. The cesarean delivery rate is not significantly reduced.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) on September 29, 2020, with trial identification number: ISRCTN87066007 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN87066007). The first participant was recruited on September 29, 2020, after ISRCTN registry confirmation was received.

Directive clinique no 432c : Déclenchement artificiel du travail

OBJECTIFS

Présenter des données probantes et des recommandations sur la maturation cervicale et le déclenchement artificiel du travail. Fournir de l'information aux professionnels accoucheurs et aux personnes enceintes sur les soins périnataux optimaux et la prévention des interventions obstétricales inutiles.

POPULATION CIBLE

Toutes les patientes enceintes. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La mise en application interprofessionnelle et cohérente de la présente directive, l'équipement adéquat et le personnel compétent améliorent la sécurité des soins per partum. Les personnes enceintes et leurs personnes de soutien doivent être informées des risques et bénéfices du déclenchement artificiel du travail. DONNéES PROBANTES: La littérature publiée jusqu'en mars 2022 a été passée en revue. Une recherche a été effectuée dans les bases de données PubMed, CINAHL et Cochrane Library pour répertorier des revues systématiques, des essais cliniques randomisés et des études observationnelles sur la maturation cervicale et le déclenchement artificiel du travail. La littérature grise (non publiée) a été obtenue à l'aide de recherches menées dans des sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, des registres d'essais cliniques et des sites Web de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe A en ligne (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Tous les fournisseurs de soins obstétricaux. DÉCLARATIONS SOMMAIRESMISOPROSTOL: OCYTOCINE: RECOMMANDATIONS.

Guideline No. 432c: Induction of Labour

OBJECTIVES

This guideline presents evidence and recommendations for cervical ripening and induction of labour. It aims to provide information to birth attendants and pregnant individuals on optimal perinatal care while avoiding unnecessary obstetrical intervention.

TARGET POPULATION

All pregnant patients.

BENEFITS, RISKS, AND COSTS

Consistent interprofessional use of the guideline, appropriate equipment, and trained professional staff enhance safe intrapartum care. Pregnant individuals and their support person(s) should be informed of the benefits and risks of induction of labour.

EVIDENCE

Literature published to March 2022 was reviewed. PubMed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were used to search for systematic reviews, randomized control trials, and observational studies on cervical ripening and induction labour. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified by searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

All providers of obstetrical care.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

Misoprostol OXYTOCIN: RECOMMENDATIONS.

Guideline No. 432b: Cervical Ripening

OBJECTIVE

This guideline presents evidence and recommendations for cervical ripening and induction of labour. It aims to provide information to birth attendants and pregnant individuals on optimal perinatal care while avoiding unnecessary obstetrical intervention.

TARGET POPULATION

All pregnant patients.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Consistent interprofessional use of the guideline, appropriate equipment, and trained professional staff enhance safe intrapartum care. Pregnant individuals and their support person(s) should be informed of the benefits and risks of induction of labour.

EVIDENCE

Literature published to March 2022 was reviewed. PubMed, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were used to search for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and observational studies on cervical ripening and induction of labour. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified by searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. See online Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

All providers of obstetrical care.

RECOMMANDATIONS

Directive clinique no 432b : Maturation cervicale

OBJECTIF

Présenter des données probantes et des recommandations sur la maturation cervicale et le déclenchement artificiel du travail. Fournir de l'information aux professionnels accoucheurs et aux personnes enceintes sur les soins périnataux optimaux et la prévention des interventions obstétricales inutiles.

POPULATION CIBLE

Toutes les patientes enceintes. BéNéFICES, RISQUES ET COûTS: La mise en application interprofessionnelle et cohérente de la présente directive, l'équipement adéquat et le personnel compétent améliorent la sécurité des soins per partum. Les personnes enceintes et leurs personnes de soutien doivent être informées des risques et bénéfices du déclenchement artificiel du travail. DONNéES PROBANTES: La littérature publiée jusqu'en mars 2022 a été passée en revue. Une recherche a été effectuée dans les bases de données PubMed, CINAHL et Cochrane Library pour répertorier des revues systématiques, des essais cliniques randomisés et des études observationnelles sur la maturation cervicale et le déclenchement artificiel du travail. La littérature grise (non publiée) a été obtenue à l'aide de recherches menées dans des sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, des registres d'essais cliniques et des sites Web de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales. MéTHODES DE VALIDATION: Les auteurs ont évalué la qualité des données probantes et la force des recommandations en utilisant le cadre méthodologique GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Voir l'annexe A en ligne (tableau A1 pour les définitions et tableau A2 pour l'interprétation des recommandations fortes et conditionnelles [faibles]). PROFESSIONNELS CONCERNéS: Tous les fournisseurs de soins obstétricaux.

RECOMMANDATIONS

The Effect of Using Dexamethasone Tablets Vaginally for Improving Cervical Bishop Score in Nulliparous Pregnant Women: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Cervix ripening and labor induction are common interventions in obstetrics. For optimal maternal health, labor may be induced under certain situations to improve fetal survival outcomes. Labor induction of an unripe cervix can lead to complications; therefore, several approaches can facilitate the ripening process.

Methods

This randomized clinical trial was a triple-blind study that involved 84 pregnant nulliparous women enrolled between October 2019 and June 2021 in the labor ward of Kamali Hospital, Karaj, Iran. The pregnant women in the study underwent labor induction and were randomized into 2 groups: 1 group received vaginal dexamethasone and the other group was given a placebo.

Results

There was no significant difference between the groups regarding maternal age, demographic characteristics, and initial Bishop score. The median second Bishop score (6 hours after intervention) was 3.5 in dexamethasone recipients and 3 in placebo recipients (P = 0.48). The median labor latent phase duration was 4 hours in dexamethasone recipients and 5 hours in placebo recipients (P = 0.57).

Conclusions

This randomized clinical trial demonstrated that administering dexamethasone tablets vaginally did not significantly improve cervical Bishop scores. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2023; 84:XXX-XXX). ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05070468.

Efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Misoprostol is a synthetic PGE1 analogue that is used for induction of labour. Current guidelines support the use of doses that do not exceed 25 mcg in order to limit maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. The present meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and safety of oral compared to vaginally inserted misoprostol in terms of induction of labor and adverse peripartum outcomes.

Methods

We searched Medline, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception till April 2022. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of oral misoprostol (per os or sublingual) compared to vaginally inserted misoprostol. Effect sizes were calculated in R. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the possibility of small study effects, p-hacking. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis according to the dose of misoprostol was also investigated. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the risk of bias 2 tool. Quality of evidence for primary outcomes was evaluated under the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, ranging from very low to high.

Results

Overall, 57 studies were included that involved 10,975 parturient. Their risk of bias ranged between low-moderate. There were no differences among the routes of intake in terms of successful vaginal delivery within 24 h (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80) and cesarean section rates (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82, 1.04). Sublingual misoprostol was superior compared to vaginal misoprostol in reducing the interval from induction to delivery (MD – 1.11 h, 95% CI – 2.06, – 0.17). On the other hand, per os misoprostol was inferior compared to vaginal misoprostol in terms of this outcome (MD 3.45 h, 95% CI 1.85, 5.06). Maternal and neonatal morbidity was not affected by the route or dose of misoprostol.

Conclusion

The findings of our study suggest that oral misoprostol intake is equally safe to vaginal misoprostol in terms of inducing labor at term. Sublingual intake seems to outperform the per os and vaginal routes without increasing the accompanying morbidity. Increasing the dose of misoprostol does not seem to increase its efficacy.

Clinical trial registration

Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/V9JHF).

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.

Balloon catheters versus vaginal prostaglandins for labour induction (CPI Collaborative): an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Induction of labour is one of the most common obstetric interventions globally. Balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins are widely used to ripen the cervix in labour induction. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety profiles of these two induction methods.

METHODS

We did an individual participant data meta-analysis comparing balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening before labour induction. We systematically identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that completed data collection between March 19, 2019, and May 1, 2021, by searching the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and PubMed. Further trials done before March 19, 2019, were identified through a recent Cochrane review. Data relating to the combined use of the two methods were not included, only data from women with a viable, singleton pregnancy were analysed, and no exclusion was made based on parity or membrane status. We contacted authors of individuals trials and participant-level data were harmonised and recoded according to predefined definitions of variables. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROB2 tool. The primary outcomes were caesarean delivery, indication for caesarean delivery, a composite adverse perinatal outcome, and a composite adverse maternal outcome. We followed the intention-to-treat principle for the main analysis. The primary meta-analysis used two-stage random-effects models and the sensitivity analysis used one-stage mixed models. All models were adjusted for maternal age and parity. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020179924).

FINDINGS

Individual participant data were available from 12 studies with a total of 5460 participants. Balloon catheters, compared with vaginal prostaglandins, did not lead to a significantly different rate of caesarean delivery (12 trials, 5414 women; crude incidence 27·0%; adjusted OR [aOR] 1·09, 95% CI 0·95-1·24; I²=0%), caesarean delivery for failure to progress (11 trials, 4601 women; aOR 1·20, 95% CI 0·91-1·58; I²=39%), or caesarean delivery for fetal distress (10 trials, 4441 women; aOR 0·86, 95% CI 0·71-1·04; I²=0%). The composite adverse perinatal outcome was lower in women who were allocated to balloon catheters than in those allocated to vaginal prostaglandins (ten trials, 4452 neonates, crude incidence 13·6%; aOR 0·80, 95% CI 0·70-0·92; I²=0%). There was no significant difference in the composite adverse maternal outcome (ten trials, 4326 women, crude incidence 22·7%; aOR 1·02, 95% CI 0·89-1·18; I²=0%).

INTERPRETATION

In induction of labour, balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins have comparable caesarean delivery rates and maternal safety profiles, but balloon catheters lead to fewer adverse perinatal events.

FUNDING

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Monash Health Emerging Researcher Fellowship.

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.

Sublingual misoprostol vs. oral misoprostol solution for induction of labor: A retrospective study

Introduction

Induction of labor (IOL) is one of the most common obstetrical procedures, with an increasing rate. The prostaglandin E1 analogue misoprostol is frequently used as a primary method of labor induction. The optimal dose and route of administration is yet to be ascertained.

Aim

To compare efficiacy and safety between a regimen of sublingually administered misoprostol and a regimen of orally administered misoprostol, with cesarean delivery as primary outcome.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted including women carrying a live, singleton fetus in a cephalic position with labor induced at >37 + 0 gestational weeks at Skåne University hospital, Lund, between January 1st 2013 to December 31st 2017. Data was obtained from computerized obstetrical charts.

Results

Totally 2,404 women were included; 974 induced with sublingual misoprostol and 1,430 with oral solution. In primiparous women the cesarean delivery rate was lower in primiparous women induced with oral compared to sublingual misoprostol (20.5% vs. 28.6%, p < 0.001), whereas in parous women the rates did not differ significantly 4.9% vs. 7.5%; NS). The increased risk of caesarean remained after controlling for potential confounding factors (adjusted odds ratio 1.49 (1.14–1.95). Women induced with sublingual misoprostol had a shorter time to vaginal delivery when compared to oral solution (primiparous median 16.7 h vs. 21.7 h; p < 0.001, parous median 9.9 h vs. 13.3 h; p = 0.01), and a higher rate of vaginal delivery within 24 h (primiparas 77.7% vs. 63.3%, p < 0.001, parous 93.2% vs. 84.2%; p = 0.01).

Conclusion

IOL with oral misoprostol solution was associated with a significantly higher vaginal delivery rate when compared to sublingual misoprostol, whereas sublingual misoprostol was associated with a significantly shorter time from induction to vaginal delivery. Oral administration is considered the most safe and efficient administration of misoprostol, although more studies are needed to find the optimal route and dosage of misoprostol for IOL.

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.

The importance of fetal adrenal gland volume measurement in successful labor induction with oxytocin

AIM

We aimed to show the predictive value of fetal adrenal gland volume (FAGV) measurement in the success of labor induction with oxytocin.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort study that included a total of 103 term nulliparous. Immediately after deciding to induce labor with oxytocin, the fetal right and left adrenal gland measurements were obtained.

RESULTS

Induction success was achieved in 89 of 103 (86.4%) pregnant women. In comparison of the FAGV values of failed induction labor group, the total volumes of right and left fetal adrenal glands and the fetal zone volumes (FZV) were found to be statistically significantly higher in the successful labor induction group (p < 0.001). In predicting induction success, the cut-off value of fetal adrenal gland volume (cFAGV) was set as >230.2 mm³ /kg and area under curve (AUC) value of 0.872 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.736-1.000) for right total adrenal gland (p < 0.001). The cut-off value of cFAGV was set as >236.7 mm³ /kg and AUC value of 0.891(95%CI, 0.768-1.000) (p < 0.001) for left total adrenal gland. The cut-off value of cFAGV was set as >12.6 mm³ /kg and AUC value of 0.952 (95%CI, 0.905-0.999) for right FZV(p < 0.001). The cut-off value of cFAGV was set as >7.8 mm³ /kg and AUC value of 0.884 (95%CI, 0.752-1.000) for left FZV (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Two-dimension ultrasonographic measurement is an easy-to-access and noninvasive method that can be integrated into the algorithms to predict the success of induction based on FAGV measurement.

Evaluating misoprostol and mechanical methods for induction of labour: Scientific Impact Paper No. 68 April 2022

Increasingly, births around the world are started artificially using medications or other methods. This process is known as induction of labour. As it becomes more common, methods are needed to meet the different clinical needs and birth preferences of women. Induction of labour typically includes a combination of the medication dinoprostone inserted into the vagina, artificial rupture of membranes ('releasing the waters'), and synthetic oxytocin (hormone given via a drip). This paper reviews some of the methods less commonly used for induction in the UK, namely a drug called misoprostol, which can be given orally or vaginally, and 'mechanical' methods, where labour is started by stretching the cervix (neck of the womb), most commonly with a soft silicone tube with a balloon near the tip, filled with water. Low-dose oral misoprostol tablets are now commercially available in the UK. Other methods for labour induction are not reviewed in detail in this paper. The evidence suggests mechanical induction of labour (using a balloon catheter) and misoprostol are both at least as safe and effective as using the standard drug, dinoprostone. There is evidence to suggest a balloon catheter may reduce the chance of serious negative outcomes for babies when compared with dinoprostone, and that giving low-dose oral misoprostol results in fewer caesarean births. Where possible and after informed consent, the method of induction of labour should be personalised to suit the individual woman, her clinical condition, and the setting in which she is giving birth. Local contexts and resources also need to be taken into account. To date, research into women's perspectives and experiences of induction of labour have been significantly lacking.

[Efficacy and safety of oral misoprostol 25μg vs. vaginal dinoprostone in induction of labor at term]

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy and safety of oral misoprostol 25μg compared to vaginal dinoprostone in the induction of labor at term.

METHODS

Analytic, retrospective study of patients induced at term by prostaglandins with an unfavorable cervix, over two consecutive periods from 01/01/2019 to 19/02/2020 and from 20/02/2020 to 07/04/2021, within a regional level III university hospital center. We compared the safety and the efficacy between the oral misoprostol Angusta® used since 20/02/2020 and the vaginal dinoprostone previously used in gel or diffuser. The primary endpoint was the rate of vaginal deliveries within 24h. Secondary endpoints were cesarean section rate, indications for cesarean section, uterine contractility abnormalities and neonatal outcomes.

RESULTS

Our study found no difference in terms of efficacy with similar rates of vaginal deliveries within 24h (51.88% vs. 51.25%; P=0.87) and caesarean sections (misoprostol group: 19.42% vs. dinoprostone group: 16.62%; P=0.33). However, the tolerance criteria revealed in the dinoprostone group an increase in tachysystole (misoprostol group: 9.28% vs. dinoprostone group: 16.90%; P=0.003) and acidosis (arterial pH<7.10, misoprostol group: 3.83% vs. dinoprostone group: 9.29%; P=0.006).

CONCLUSION

No difference in efficacy was found between the two induction techniques. Oral misoprostol 25μg seems to be better tolerated from a maternal and fetal point of view.

Oral misoprostol tablets (25 µg) for induction of labor: a targeted literature review and cost analysis

BACKGROUND

Various methods exist for the induction of labor (IOL), and there is limited consensus as to optimal methods. Off-label misoprostol is recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) for IOL but preparing it into doses suitable for IOL lacks precision, with potential adverse outcomes if dosing is inaccurate. This study explores potential outcomes and costs associated with increased uptake of a low-dose (25 µg) oral misoprostol formulation (Angusta; Norgine BV, Amsterdam) approved for IOL, in France, Belgium, and the Netherlands.

METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to derive probabilities of delivery outcomes (vaginal, instrumental, and cesarean sections) for IOL methods, from published meta-analyses. Outcomes for oral misoprostol tablets (25 µg) were unavailable in the meta-analyses, so were estimated using data from two published retrospective cohort studies. A model was developed to predict the frequency of IOL outcomes and associated costs at the national level, across multiple scenarios. Scenarios were tested using a moderate, medium, and high increase in oral misoprostol tablet (25 µg) uptake. Market shares, costs, and induction rates were defined for each country using multiple data sources.

RESULTS

Increased uptake of oral misoprostol tablets (25 µg) was estimated to be associated with a slightly increased rate of routine vaginal deliveries, and concurrent decreases in instrumental vaginal deliveries and cesarean sections. Since routine vaginal deliveries are less costly than other delivery outcomes, increased uptake of oral misoprostol tablets (25 µg) within the IOL market has the potential to be cost-saving. These trends were predicted using 25 µg oral misoprostol tablet outcomes informed by both retrospective studies.

CONCLUSION

Preliminary outcomes suggest that oral misoprostol tablets at 25 µg per dose may improve outcomes in IOL and be cost-saving. Further study is required to validate these findings and assess the comparative efficacy of IOL methods, including oral misoprostol tablets (25 µg).

Moving preinduction cervical ripening to a lower acuity inpatient setting using the synthetic hygroscopic cervical dilator: a cost-consequence analysis for the United States

BACKGROUND

Leveraging the safety profile of the synthetic hygroscopic cervical dilator (SHCD), one potential way to reduce the burden-of-care provision in the labor-and-delivery unit without compromising safety is to introduce a low-acuity care room (ripening room) for patients undergoing cervical ripening as a part of labor induction at term.

METHODS

Implementing a ripening room using SHCDs was compared to scenarios using prostaglandins including a dinoprostone insert (PGE2 insert) or gel (PGE2 gel) and misoprostol given orally (oral PGE1) or vaginally (vaginal PGE1). A theoretical, cost-consequence model was developed to assess costs, staff time, and selected clinical outcomes related to cervical ripening. The model assessed a hypothetical cohort where patients remained in hospital from admission for induction of labor (IOL) to delivery, taking the US labor-and-delivery unit perspective. Model inputs were taken from structured searches of PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov, published US guidance, and clinical practice. Results are presented as mean (95% credible interval [CrI]).

RESULTS

The ripening room using SHCDs cost US$3,210 and required 10.22 hours (h) of nurse time on average per patient. The cost difference to prostaglandins ranged from -$894 (-$2,269 to $398) for PGE2 gel to +$460 (-$1,467 to $1,539) for vaginal PGE1. Mean nurse time was shorter than all prostaglandins, with time savings ranging from -7.05 (-24.55 to 5.73) h for PGE2 insert to -0.97 (-14.69 to 9.59) h for vaginal PGE1. When outcomes of the probabilistic sensitivity analysis were ranked from 1 (best) to 5 (worst), the ripening room using SHCDs ranked 1.94 for costs and 1.97 for nurse time. In a nulliparous population, results improved for the ripening room using SHCDs relative to all prostaglandins.

CONCLUSION

In this theoretical study, implementing a ripening room using SHCDs resulted in the lowest time burden and the second lowest costs. The cheapest option for preinduction cervical ripening was vaginal misoprostol.

Induction of labor at term with vaginal misoprostol or a prostaglandin E2 pessary: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Induction of labor is among the most common procedures for pregnant women. Only a few randomized clinical trials with relatively small samples have compared misoprostol with dinoprostone. Although their efficacy seems similar, their safety profiles have not been adequately evaluated, and economic data are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to test the noninferiority of vaginal misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) (25 μg) to a slow-release dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2) pessary (10 μg) for induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix at term.

STUDY DESIGN

This was an open-label multicenter randomized noninferiority trial at 4 university hospitals of the Research Group in Obstetrics and Gynecology between 2012 and 2015. We recruited women who underwent induction of labor for medical reasons, those with a Bishop score of ≤5 at ≥36 weeks' gestation, and those with a cephalic-presenting singleton pregnancy with no previous cesarean delivery. Women were randomly allocated to receive either vaginal misoprostol at 4-hour intervals (25 μg) or a 10-mg slow-release dinoprostone pessary. The primary outcome was the total cesarean delivery rate. Noninferiority was defined as a difference in the cesarean delivery rates between the groups of no more than 5%. Secondary outcomes included neonatal and maternal morbidity, vaginal delivery at <24 hours after starting the induction of labor process, and maternal satisfaction.

RESULTS

The study included 1674 randomized women. The per-protocol analysis included 790 women in each group. The total cesarean delivery rates were 22.1% (n=175) in the misoprostol group and 19.9% (n=157) in the dinoprostone group, a difference of 2.2% (with an upper-bound 95% confidence limit of 5.6%) (P=.092). Results in the intention-to-treat analysis were similar. Neonatal and maternal morbidity rates were similar between groups. Vaginal delivery within 24 hours was significantly higher in the misoprostol group (59.3% vs 45.7%; P<.001) as was maternal satisfaction, assessed in the postpartum period by a visual analog scale (mean score, 7.1±2.4 vs 5.8±3.1; P<.001).

CONCLUSION

The noninferiority of a 25-μg dose of vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours to the dinoprostone pessary for cesarean delivery rates after induction of labor at term could not be demonstrated, although the confidence limit of the difference barely exceeded the noninferiority margin. Nonetheless, given the small difference between these cesarean delivery rates and the similarity of neonatal and maternal morbidity rates in this large study, the clinical risk-to-benefit ratio justifies the use of both drugs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone pessary: A non-inferiority large randomized controlled trial in France

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of vaginal misoprostol (PGE1; 25 μg) compared with a slow-release dinoprostone (PGE2) pessary (10 μg) for labor induction due to an unfavorable cervix at term.

METHODS

We used data from an open-label multicenter, randomized non-inferiority trial that recruited women for whom labor was induced for medical reasons. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was assessed from the payer's perspective, with the focus on inpatient care costs and using the cesarean deliveries avoided (CDA) rate as the primary analysis and the rate of vaginal delivery within 24 h (VD24) as the secondary analysis.

RESULTS

Analyses were based on 790 women in each group. Differences between treatment arms were the mean cost per patient of €4410 and €4399, a CDA rate of 80.1% and 77.9% and a VD24 rate of 46.1% and 59.4% for dinoprostone and misoprostol, respectively. Dinoprostone is not cost-effective according to the CDA rate and misoprostol was either a cost-effective or a dominant strategy according to the VD24.

CONCLUSION

Misoprostol and dinoprostone have equal cost management with mixed efficacy according to the clinical outcome used. Finally, misoprostol may be an attractive option for hospitals as the price is lower and it is easier to use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01765881. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01765881. ClinicalTrialRegistrer.eu: 2011-000933-35. URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/trial/2011-000933-35/FR.

Towards an evidence-based approach to optimize the success of labour induction

Induction of labour is a two-step process involving cervical ripening and the initiation of uterine contractions, with the goal of achieving vaginal birth. To optimize the chance of a safe and timely vaginal birth, the process of induction of labour should be evidence based and individualized to the given person and situation. In this study, we lay out a framework for how this should be done, emphasizing on careful clinical assessment and planning, flexibility in the strategy of induction, patience during the ripening and latent phases of labour, and thoughtful consideration regarding changing the strategy if active labour is not initially achieved. The goal of this review is to present the current evidence on this topic in the form of a user-friendly protocol that can be easily adapted to institutional practice.

The effect of dexamethasone on labor induction: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effect of dexamethasone administration on the interval between initiation of labor induction and active phase of labor.

METHODS

The databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science were searched for studies published up to June 27, 2021. Two types of articles were included: a) full-text articles published in English or any other languages, and b) Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). Participants were primi- or multigravida women with term or post-term pregnancy. The intervention group received parenteral or extra-amniotic dexamethasone whereas the control group received normal saline or no treatment before initiation of labor induction. All data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies involving 1879 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Administration of dexamethasone reduced the interval between the initiation of labor induction and the beginning of active phase by about 70 min [MD: - 1.17 (- 1.37, - 1.00); P < 0.00001]. Duration of the first stage of labor in the dexamethasone group was about 88 min shorter than that in the control. There were no maternal and fetal adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Dexamethasone could significantly reduce the length of induction-active phase interval, and length of the first stage of labor, with no difference in maternal or fetal adverse effects.

Induction of Labour. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k, AWMF Registry No. 015-088, December 2020)

Aim The aim of this official guideline published and coordinated by the German Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (DGGG) in cooperation with the Austrian Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (OEGGG) and the Swiss Society of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (SGGG) is to provide a consensus-based overview of the indications, methods and general management of induction of labour by evaluating the relevant literature. Methods This S2k guideline was developed using a structured consensus process which included representative members from various professions; the guideline was commissioned by the guidelines commission of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG. Recommendations The guideline provides recommendations on the indications, management, methods, monitoring and special situations occurring in the context of inducing labour.

Labour Induction with Misoprostol in German Obstetric Clinics: What Are the Facts on Such Use?

Subject While the synthetic prostaglandin E1 analogue misoprostol is the most effect labour induction agent, its use is off-label for the most part. For this reason, and in view of its potential adverse effects and varying approaches to its administration, the drug has recently once again become a focus of critical attention. The objective of this survey was thus to establish a record of labour induction with misoprostol in German clinics and determine the impact of the negative reporting on everyday obstetric practice. Material and Methods In this cross-sectional study, 635 obstetrics and gynaecology departments in Germany were requested by email to participate in our survey in February/March 2020. Online responses to 19 questions were requested regarding the clinic, use of misoprostol before and after the critical reporting, use of misoprostol (sourcing, method of administration, dosage, monitoring) and other labour induction methods. Results A total of 262 (41.3%) of the clinics solicited for the survey completed the questionnaire. There were no differences regarding the care level (Perinatal Centre Level I, Perinatal Centre Level II, Clinic with Perinatal Focus or Obstetric/Private Clinic; p = 0.2104) or birth counts (p = 0.1845). In most cases, misoprostol was prepared in the clinic's own pharmacy (54%) or imported from another country (46%) and administered orally in tablet form (95%). Misoprostol dosage levels varied (25 µg [48%], 50 µg [83%], 75 µg [6%], 100 µg [47%] and > 100 µg [5%]). Most of the clinics used premanufactured tablets/capsules (59%), although Cytotec tablets were also divided (35%) or dissolved in water (5%). Misoprostol administration intervals were mainly every 4 hours (64%) or every 6 hours (30%). CTG checks were run in most cases before and after administration of a dose of misoprostol (78% and 76%) and before and after administration of a dose of prostaglandin E2 (both 88%). Presence of contractions led to no misoprostol (59%) or no prostaglandin E2 (64%) being administered in most cases. The critical reporting resulted in discontinuation of use of misoprostol in 17% of the clinics - mainly smaller obstetric/private clinics with fewer than 1000 births. Labour cocktails were used mainly in obstetric and private clinics (61%). Conclusion Misoprostol is an established agent for labour induction in German clinics. The dosing schemes used vary. Improvements of currently common management practices are required, especially in the area of labour induction (CTG checks before and after administration of labour-inducing medication, no administration of prostaglandin if contractions are ongoing). The discussion of use of misoprostol in the media resulted in stoppage of its use mainly in smaller clinics.

Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Misoprostol given orally is a commonly used labour induction method. Our Cochrane Review is restricted to studies with low-dose misoprostol (initially ≤ 50 µg), as higher doses pose unacceptably high risks of uterine hyperstimulation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose oral misoprostol for labour induction in women with a viable fetus in the third trimester of pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov,  the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (14 February 2021) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing low-dose oral misoprostol (initial dose ≤ 50 µg) versus placebo, vaginal dinoprostone, vaginal misoprostol, oxytocin, or mechanical methods; or comparing oral misoprostol protocols (one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly; 20 µg to 25 µg versus 50 µg; or 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using Covidence, two review authors independently screened reports, extracted trial data, and performed quality assessments. Our primary outcomes were vaginal birth within 24 hours, caesarean section, and hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 61 trials involving 20,026 women. GRADE assessments ranged from moderate- to very low-certainty evidence, with downgrading decisions based on imprecision, inconsistency, and study limitations. Oral misoprostol versus placebo/no treatment (four trials; 594 women) Oral misoprostol may make little to no difference in the rate of caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.11; 4 trials; 594 women; moderate-certainty evidence), while its effect on uterine hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 5.15, 95% CI 0.25 to 105.31; 3 trials; 495 women; very low-certainty evidence). Vaginal births within 24 hours was not reported. In all trials, oxytocin could be commenced after 12 to 24 hours and all women had pre-labour ruptured membranes. Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone (13 trials; 9676 women) Oral misoprostol probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.90; 13 trials, 9676 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicated that 10 µg to 25 µg (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87; 9 trials; 8652 women) may differ from 50 µg (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.34; 4 trials; 1024 women) for caesarean section. Oral misoprostol may decrease vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.00; 10 trials; 8983 women; low-certainty evidence) and hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59; 11 trials; 9084 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol (33 trials; 6110 women) Oral use may result in fewer vaginal births within 24 hours (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95; 16 trials, 3451 women; low-certainty evidence), and less hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.92, 25 trials, 4857 women, low-certainty evidence), with subgroup analysis suggesting that 10 µg to 25 µg orally (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 trials, 957 women) may be superior to 50 µg orally (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.11; 19 trials; 3900 women). Oral misoprostol probably does not increase caesarean sections overall (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16; 32 trials; 5914 women; low-certainty evidence) but likely results in fewer caesareans for foetal distress (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99; 24 trials, 4775 women). Oral misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin (6 trials; 737 women, 200 with ruptured membranes) Misoprostol may make little or no difference to vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.33; 3 trials; 466 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 6 trials; 737 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.26; 3 trials, 331 women; very low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus mechanical methods (6 trials; 2993 women) Six trials compared oral misoprostol to transcervical Foley catheter. Misoprostol may increase vaginal birth within 24 hours (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.79; 4 trials; 1044 women; low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of caesarean section (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; 6 trials; 2993 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.21; 4 trials; 2828 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly (1 trial; 64 women) The evidence on hourly titration was very uncertain due to the low numbers reported. Oral misoprostol 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static (2 trials; 296 women) The difference in regimen may have little or no effect on the rate of vaginal births in 24 hours (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is of very low certainty for all other reported outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose oral misoprostol is probably associated with fewer caesarean sections (and therefore more vaginal births) than vaginal dinoprostone, and lower rates of hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes. However, time to birth may be increased, as seen by a reduced number of vaginal births within 24 hours. Compared to transcervical Foley catheter, low-dose oral misoprostol is associated with fewer caesarean sections, but equivalent rates of hyperstimulation. Low-dose misoprostol given orally rather than vaginally is probably associated with similar rates of vaginal birth, although rates may be lower within the first 24 hours. However, there is likely less hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes, and fewer caesarean sections performed due to foetal distress. The best available evidence suggests that low-dose oral misoprostol probably has many benefits over other methods for labour induction. This review supports the use of low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour, and demonstrates the lower risks of hyperstimulation than when misoprostol is given vaginally. More trials are needed to establish the optimum oral misoprostol regimen, but these findings suggest that a starting dose of 25 µg may offer a good balance of efficacy and safety.

Late Pregnancy Ultrasound to Screen for and Manage Potential Birth Complications in Nulliparous Women: A Cost-Effectiveness and Value of Information Analysis

BACKGROUND

Fetal growth restriction is a major risk factor for stillbirth. A routine late-pregnancy ultrasound scan could help detect this, allowing intervention to reduce the risk of stillbirth. Such a scan could also detect fetal presentation and predict macrosomia. A trial powered to detect stillbirth differences would be extremely large and expensive.

OBJECTIVES

It is therefore critical to know whether this would be a good investment of public research funds. The aim of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of various late-pregnancy screening and management strategies based on current information and predict the return on investment from further research.

METHODS

Synthesis of current evidence structured into a decision model reporting expected costs, quality-adjusted life-years, and net benefit over 20 years and value-of-information analysis reporting predicted return on investment from future clinical trials.

RESULTS

Given a willingness to pay of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, the most cost-effective strategy is a routine presentation-only scan for all women. Universal ultrasound screening for fetal size is unlikely to be cost-effective. Research exploring the cost implications of induction of labor has the greatest predicted return on investment. A randomized, controlled trial with an endpoint of stillbirth is extremely unlikely to be a value for money investment.

CONCLUSION

Given current value-for-money thresholds in the United Kingdom, the most cost-effective strategy is to offer all pregnant women a presentation-only scan in late pregnancy. A randomized, controlled trial of screening and intervention to reduce the risk of stillbirth following universal ultrasound to detect macrosomia or fetal growth restriction is unlikely to represent a value for money investment.

Safety and efficacy of an oral misoprostol standard-dose regimen vs a low-dose regimen for induction of labour in Papua New Guinean women: An open-label randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Oral misoprostol is widely used for induction of labour (IOL) in developing countries because of its many advantages. However, limited data exist concerning its safety and efficacy when lower doses are used.

AIM

To determine the safety and efficacy of a low-dose oral misoprostol regimen (commencing at 12 μg) compared to a standard-dose regimen (commencing at 25 μg) in Papua New Guinea (PNG) women undergoing IOL.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an open-label non-inferiority randomised controlled trial conducted at a provincial hospital in PNG. Women with singleton pregnancies ≥36 weeks with cephalic presentation and a Bishops score of <6, requiring IOL were enrolled. Both regimens were incremented second-hourly to a maximum required dose within 24 h or until commencement of labour. The primary outcome was the proportion of women who delivered within 24 h of drug administration without any severe adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 262 women induced (130 standard-dose vs 132 low-dose), rates of successful induction were high for both regimens (120/130 (92%) vs 118/132 (89%); P = 0.52). Fourteen women (11%) in the standard-dose regimen and 20 (15%) in the low-dose regimen had severe adverse events. There was no significant difference in the safety profile of the two regimens (106/130 (82%) vs 98/132 (74%); P = 0.18). The induction-to-delivery time was significantly shorter in the standard-dose arm (15.2 ± 8.7 h vs 18.0 ± 9.1 h; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The standard-dose regimen for IOL has greater efficacy in reducing induction-to-delivery time compared to the low-dose regimen. There was no significant difference in the number of adverse events between the two regimens.

Cervical ripening in prolonged pregnancies by silicone double balloon catheter versus vaginal dinoprostone slow release system: The MAGPOP randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Prolonged pregnancies are a frequent indication for induction of labour. When the cervix is unfavourable, cervical ripening before oxytocin administration is recommended to increase the likelihood of vaginal delivery, but no particular method is currently recommended for cervical ripening of prolonged pregnancies. This trial evaluates whether the use of mechanical cervical ripening with a silicone double balloon catheter for induction of labour in prolonged pregnancies reduces the cesarean section rate for nonreassuring fetal status compared with pharmacological cervical ripening by a vaginal pessary for the slow release of dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2).

METHODS AND FINDINGS

This is a multicentre, superiority, open-label, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial conducted in 15 French maternity units. Women with singleton pregnancies, a vertex presentation, ≥41+0 and ≤42+0 weeks' gestation, a Bishop score <6, intact membranes, and no history of cesarean delivery for whom induction of labour was decided were randomised to either mechanical cervical ripening with a Cook Cervical Ripening Balloon or pharmacological cervical ripening by a Propess vaginal pessary serving as a prostaglandin E2 slow-release system. The primary outcome was the rate of cesarean for nonreassuring fetal status, with an independent endpoint adjudication committee determining whether the fetal heart rate was nonreassuring. Secondary outcomes included delivery (time from cervical ripening to delivery, number of patients requiring analgesics), maternal and neonatal outcomes. Between January 2017 and December 2018, 1,220 women were randomised in a 1:1 ratio, 610 allocated to a silicone double balloon catheter, and 610 to the Propess vaginal pessary for the slow release of dinoprostone. The mean age of women was 31 years old, and 80% of them were of white ethnicity. The cesarean rates for nonreassuring fetal status were 5.8% (35/607) in the mechanical ripening group and 5.3% (32/609) in the pharmacological ripening group (proportion difference: 0.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.1% to 3.1%, p = 0.70). Time from cervical ripening to delivery was shorter in the pharmacological ripening group (23 hours versus 32 hours, median difference 6.5 95% CI 5.0 to 7.9, p < 0.001), and fewer women required analgesics in the mechanical ripening group (27.5% versus 35.4%, difference in proportion -7.9%, 95% CI -13.2% to -2.7%, p = 0.003). There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups for other delivery, maternal, and neonatal outcomes. A limitation was a low observed rate of cesarean section.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed no difference in the rates of cesarean deliveries for nonreassuring fetal status between mechanical ripening with a silicone double balloon catheter and pharmacological cervical ripening with a pessary for the slow release of dinoprostone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02907060.

Universal late pregnancy ultrasound screening to predict adverse outcomes in nulliparous women: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Currently, pregnant women are screened using ultrasound to perform gestational aging, typically at around 12 weeks' gestation, and around the middle of pregnancy. Ultrasound scans thereafter are performed for clinical indications only.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the case for offering universal late pregnancy ultrasound to all nulliparous women in the UK. The main questions addressed were the diagnostic effectiveness of universal late pregnancy ultrasound to predict adverse outcomes and the cost-effectiveness of either implementing universal ultrasound or conducting further research in this area.

DESIGN

We performed diagnostic test accuracy reviews of five ultrasonic measurements in late pregnancy. We conducted cost-effectiveness and value-of-information analyses of screening for fetal presentation, screening for small for gestational age fetuses and screening for large for gestational age fetuses. Finally, we conducted a survey and a focus group to determine the willingness of women to participate in a future randomised controlled trial.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to June 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

The protocol for the review was designed a priori and registered. Eligible studies were identified using keywords, with no restrictions for language or location. The risk of bias in studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Health economic modelling employed a decision tree analysed via Monte Carlo simulation. Health outcomes were from the fetal perspective and presented as quality-adjusted life-years. Costs were from the perspective of the public sector, defined as NHS England, and the costs of special educational needs. All costs and quality-adjusted life-years were discounted by 3.5% per annum and the reference case time horizon was 20 years.

RESULTS

Umbilical artery Doppler flow velocimetry, cerebroplacental ratio, severe oligohydramnios and borderline oligohydramnios were all either non-predictive or weakly predictive of the risk of neonatal morbidity (summary positive likelihood ratios between 1 and 2) and were all weakly predictive of the risk of delivering a small for gestational age infant (summary positive likelihood ratios between 2 and 4). Suspicion of fetal macrosomia is strongly predictive of the risk of delivering a large infant, but it is only weakly, albeit statistically significantly, predictive of the risk of shoulder dystocia. Very few studies blinded the result of the ultrasound scan and most studies were rated as being at a high risk of bias as a result of treatment paradox, ascertainment bias or iatrogenic harm. Health economic analysis indicated that universal ultrasound for fetal presentation only may be both clinically and economically justified on the basis of existing evidence. Universal ultrasound including fetal biometry was of borderline cost-effectiveness and was sensitive to assumptions. Value-of-information analysis indicated that the parameter that had the largest impact on decision uncertainty was the net difference in cost between an induced delivery and expectant management.

LIMITATIONS

The primary literature on the diagnostic effectiveness of ultrasound in late pregnancy is weak. Value-of-information analysis may have underestimated the uncertainty in the literature as it was focused on the internal validity of parameters, which is quantified, whereas the greatest uncertainty may be in the external validity to the research question, which is unquantified.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal screening for presentation at term may be justified on the basis of current knowledge. The current literature does not support universal ultrasonic screening for fetal growth disorders.

FUTURE WORK

We describe proof-of-principle randomised controlled trials that could better inform the case for screening using ultrasound in late pregnancy.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017064093.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Oxytocin and cabergoline alleviate ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) by suppressing vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in an experimental model

PURPOSE

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is a life-threatening complication of ovarian stimulation in reproductive medicine. Here, we aimed to investigate the role of oxytocin (OT) and cabergoline in the prevention and alleviation of the OHSS in an animal model.

METHODS

Thirty-five female immature Wistar rats were randomly assigned to five groups. The control group (n = 7) received saline only for five consecutive days. Remaining twenty-eight rats received 10 IU of pregnant mare serum gonadotropin (PMSG) followed by 30 IU of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) to induce OHSS. Group 2 (n = 7) was managed with no additional intervention after the induction of OHSS. Group 3 (n = 7) received 100 μg/kg cabergoline 2 h before the PMSG injection for four consecutive days and 2 h before the hCG injection on the fifth day. Group 4 (n = 7) and group 5 (n = 7) received 80 μg/kg and 160 μg/kg OT after induction of OHSS, respectively. Oxytocin was administered 2 h before the PMSG injection for four consecutive days and 2 h before the hCG injection on the fifth day. Body and ovary weight, vascular permeability (VP), VEGF expression in the ovaries, and levels of VEGF in the peritoneal fluids were examined in all animals.

RESULTS

Cabergoline and OT reduced body weight, ovary weight, and VP compared to that of the OHSS group (p < 0.05). VEGF expressions in ovaries and peritoneal VEGF levels were decreased in cabergoline and OT groups compared to that of the OHSS groups (p < 0.001 for cabergoline and OT-80 μg/kg; p < 0.00001 for OT-160 μg/kg). However, there was no statistically significant difference in these parameters between the OT and cabergoline groups.

CONCLUSION

Both OT and cabergoline were active in the alleviation of OHSS through suppression of VEGF and VP. Overall, we conclude that OT is effective for downregulation for VEGF and improvement in vascular permeability in OHSS.

Costing the impact of interventions during pregnancy in the UK: a systematic review of economic evaluations

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to summarise the current evidence on the costing of resource use within UK maternity care, in order to facilitate the estimation of incremental resource and cost impacts potentially attributable to maternity care interventions.

METHODS

A systematic review of economic evaluations was conducted by searching Medline, the Health Management Information Consortium, the National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluations Database, CINAHL and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for economic evaluations within UK maternity care, published between January 2010 and August 2019 in the English language. Unit costs for healthcare activities provided to women within the antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal period were inflated to 2018-2019 prices. Assessment of study quality was performed using the Quality of Health Economic Analyses checklist.

RESULTS

Of 5084 titles or full texts screened, 37 papers were included in the final review (27 primary research articles, 7 review articles and 3 economic evaluations from NICE guidelines). Of the 27 primary research articles, 21 were scored as high quality, 3 as medium quality and 3 were low quality. Variation was noted in cost estimates for healthcare activities throughout the maternity care pathway: for midwife-led outpatient appointment, the range was £27.34-£146.25 (mean £81.78), emergency caesarean section, range was £1056.44-£4982.21 (mean £3508.93) and postnatal admission, range was £103.00-£870.10 per day (mean £469.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Wide variation exists in costs applied to maternity healthcare activities, resulting in challenges in attributing cost to maternity activities. The level of variation in cost calculations is likely to reflect the uncertainty within the system and must be dealt with by conducting sensitivity analyses. Nationally agreed prices for granular unit costs are needed to standardise cost-effectiveness evaluations of new interventions within maternity care, to be used either for research purposes or decisions regarding national intervention uptake.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019145309.

Home versus inpatient induction of labour for improving birth outcomes

BACKGROUND

The setting in which induction of labour takes place (home or inpatient) is likely to have implications for safety, women's experiences and costs. Home induction may be started at home with the subsequent active phase of labour happening either at home or in a healthcare facility (hospital, birth centre, midwifery-led unit). More commonly, home induction starts in a healthcare facility, then the woman goes home to await the start of labour. Inpatient induction takes place in a healthcare facility where the woman stays while awaiting the start of labour.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects on neonatal and maternal outcomes of third trimester home induction of labour compared with inpatient induction using the same method of induction.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (31 January 2020)), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which home and inpatient settings for induction have been compared. We included conference abstracts but excluded quasi-randomised trials and cross-over studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study reports for inclusion. Two review authors carried out data extraction and assessment of risk of bias independently. GRADE assessments were checked by a third review author.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven RCTs, six of which provided data on 1610 women and their babies. Studies were undertaken between 1998 and 2015, and all were in high- or upper-middle income countries. Most women were induced for post dates. Three studies reported government funding, one reported no funding and three did not report on their funding source. Most GRADE assessments gave very low-certainty evidence, downgrading mostly for high risk of bias and serious imprecision. 1. Home compared to inpatient induction with vaginal prostaglandin E (PGE) (two RCTs, 1028 women and babies; 1022 providing data). Although women's satisfaction may be slightly better in home settings, the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.02 to 0.34, 1 study, 399 women), very low-certainty evidence. There may be little or no difference between home and inpatient induction for other primary outcomes, with all evidence being very low certainty: - spontaneous vaginal birth (average risk ratio (RR) [aRR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.21, 2 studies, 1022 women, random-effects method); - uterine hyperstimulation (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.50, 1 study, 821 women); - caesarean birth (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.28, 2 studies, 1022 women); - neonatal infection (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.59 to 2.82, 1 study, 821 babies); - admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.90, 2 studies, 1022 babies). Studies did not report serious neonatal morbidity or mortality. 2. Home compared to inpatient induction with controlled release PGE (one RCT, 299 women and babies providing data). There was no information on whether the questionnaire on women's satisfaction with care used a validated instrument, but the findings presented showed no overall difference in scores. We found little or no difference between the groups for other primary outcomes, all also being very low-certainty evidence: - spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.14, 1 study, 299 women); - uterine hyperstimulation (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.98, 1 study, 299 women); - caesarean births (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.42, 1 study, 299 women); - admission to NICU (RR 1.38, 0.57 to 3.34, 1 study, 299 babies). The study did not report on neonatal infection nor serious neonatal morbidity or mortality. 3. Home compared to inpatient induction with balloon or Foley catheter (four RCTs; three studies, 289 women and babies providing data). It was again unclear whether questionnaires reporting women's experiences/satisfaction with care were validated instruments, with one study (48 women, 69% response rate) finding women were similarly satisfied. Home inductions may reduce the number of caesarean births, but the data are also compatible with a slight increase and are of very low-certainty (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.01, 2 studies, 159 women). There was little or no difference between the groups for other primary outcomes with all being very low-certainty evidence: - spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.98, 1 study, 48 women): - uterine hyperstimulation (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.03 to 6.79, 1 study, 48 women); - admission to NICU (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.86, 2 studies, 159 babies). There were no serious neonatal infections nor serious neonatal morbidity or mortality in the one study (involving 48 babies) assessing these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data on the effectiveness, safety and women's experiences of home versus inpatient induction of labour are limited and of very low-certainty. Given that serious adverse events are likely to be extremely rare, the safety data are more likely to come from very large observational cohort studies rather than relatively small RCTs.

Safety of misoprostol for near-term and term induction in small-for-gestational-age pregnancies compared to dinoprostone and primary cesarean section: results of a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Small-for-gestational-age (SGA) pregnancy is a condition often leading to labor induction due to concerns about the possibility of an increased risk for fetal morbidity and mortality. In this retrospective cohort study, we try to evaluate the safety of oral misoprostol for labor induction in near-term and term pregnancies in SGA fetuses compared to dinoprostone as well as to planned primary cesarean section.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of labor indution and primary cesarean section in SGA pregnancies 37 weeks and beyond in a tertiary care centre. In total, 284 consecutive patients with SGA fetuses were included. 80 recieved oral misoprostol, 85 dinoprostone as vaginal Gel and 119 were delivered by means of primary cesarean section. Primary endpoints were umbilical aterial pH and APGAR 5'. Secondary endpoints were APGAR 1' and 10', rates of relevant acidosis with a pH < 7.11 and depressed children, NICU admissions and vaginal operative deliveries as well as cesarean sections after labor induction.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found concerning the umbilical arterial pH. No significant differences were found concerning APGAR 5' after labor induction; however, APGAR 5' was significantly lower after primary cesarean section. Similar results were found concerning APGAR 1', 10-min APGAR values were not significantly different. Rates of relevant acidosis and depressed children did not differ; no significant differences were found concerning NICU admissions between all groups and vaginal operative deliveries and CS rates after labor induciton.

CONCLUSION

Oral misoprosol is a safe method for labor induction in SGA near-term and term pregnancies and, concerning the neonatal outcome, comparable with other methods of labor induction or primary CS. Our study showed no adverse neonatal outcomes related to the use of oral misoprostol.

Evidence-based labor management: induction of labor (part 2)

Induction of labor is indicated for many obstetrical, maternal, and fetal indications. Induction can be offered for pregnancy at 39 weeks' gestation. No prediction method is considered sensitive or specific enough to determine the incidence of cesarean delivery after induction. A combination of 60- to 80-mL single-balloon Foley catheter for 12 hours and either 25-μg oral misoprostol initially, followed by 25 μg every 2-4 hours, or 50 μg every 4-6 hours (if no more than 3 contractions per 10 minutes or previous uterine surgery), or oxytocin infusion should be recommended for induction of labor. Adding membrane stripping at the beginning of induction should be considered. Once 5-6 cm of cervical dilation is achieved during the induction of labor, consideration can be given to discontinue oxytocin infusion if in use at that time and adequate contractions are present. Induction with oxytocin immediately (as soon as feasible) or up to 12 hours of term prelabor rupture of membranes if labor is not evident is recommended. Outpatient Foley ripening can be considered for low-risk women. Cesarean delivery should not be performed before 15 hours of oxytocin infusion and amniotomy if feasible and ideally after 18-24 hours of oxytocin infusion.