Am J Perinatol 2019; 36(01): 045-052 DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1648228
SMFM Fellowship Series Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.
Nonmedically Indicated Induction of Labor Compared with Expectant Management in Nulliparous Women Aged 35 Years or Older
Tetsuya Kawakita
1
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Katherine Bowers
2
Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
,
Jane C. Khoury
2
Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
3
Division of Endocrinology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
› InstitutsangabenFunding The data included in this article were obtained from the Consortium on Safe Labor, supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NICHD, NIH through contract number HHSN267200603425C. This project was funded in part with Federal funds (Grant # UL1TR000101 previously UL1RR031975) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), through the Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program (CTSA), a trademark of DHHS, part of the Roadmap Initiative, “Re-Engineering the Clinical Research Enterprise.”
Objective This article compares maternal and neonatal outcomes in women aged ≥ 35 years who experienced nonmedically indicated induction of labor (NMII) versus expectant management.
Study Design This was a retrospective cohort study of nulliparas aged ≥ 35 years with a singleton and cephalic presentation who delivered at term. Outcomes were compared between women who underwent NMII at 37, 38, 39, and 40 weeks' gestation and those with expectant management that week. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated, controlling for predefined covariates.
Results Of 3,819 nulliparas aged ≥ 35 years, 1,409 (36.9%) women underwent NMII. Overall at 39 weeks' gestation or later, maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar or improved with NMII. At 37, 38, and 39 weeks' gestation, NMII compared with expectant management was associated with decreased odds of cesarean delivery at 37, 38, and 39 weeks' gestation. At 40 weeks' gestation, NMII compared with expectant management was associated with an increased odds of operative vaginal delivery and a decreased odds of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission.
Conclusion In nulliparous women aged ≥ 35 years, NMII was associated with decreased odds of cesarean delivery at 37 to 39 weeks' gestation and decreased odds of NICU admission at 40 weeks' gestation compared with expectant management.
Keywords
cesarean delivery -
expectant management -
induction of labor -
macrosomia -
neonatal intensive care unit
Note
This study was approved by the MedStar Institutional Review Board (#2016–071, April 20, 2016). This study was presented as a poster presentation at the SMFM 37th Annual Meeting–The pregnancy meeting, Las Vegas, NV, January 23–28, 2017.
References
1
Hamilton BE,
Martin JA,
Osterman MJK.
, et al. Births: preliminary data for 2013. National Vital Statistics Reports; Vol. 63, No 2. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2014
5
Page JM,
Snowden JM,
Cheng YW,
Doss AE,
Rosenstein MG,
Caughey AB.
The risk of stillbirth and infant death by each additional week of expectant management stratified by maternal age. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209 (04) 375.e1-375.e7
6
Nicholson JM,
Kellar LC,
Kellar GM.
The impact of the interaction between increasing gestational age and obstetrical risk on birth outcomes: evidence of a varying optimal time of delivery. J Perinatol 2006; 26 (07) 392-402
9
Vrouenraets FP,
Roumen FJ,
Dehing CJ,
van den Akker ES,
Aarts MJ,
Scheve EJ.
Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105 (04) 690-697
12
Bailit JL,
Grobman W,
Zhao Y.
, et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network. Nonmedically indicated induction vs expectant treatment in term nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 212 (01) 103.e1-103.e7
13
Walker KF,
Bugg GJ,
Macpherson M.
, et al; 35/39 Trial Group. Randomized trial of labor induction in women 35 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 2016; 374 (09) 813-822
14
Zhang J,
Troendle J,
Reddy UM.
, et al; Consortium on Safe Labor. Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 203 (04) 326.e1-326.e10
17
Caughey AB,
Sundaram V,
Kaimal AJ.
, et al. Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151 (04) 252-263
18
Cheng YW,
Kaimal AJ,
Snowden JM,
Nicholson JM,
Caughey AB.
Induction of labor compared to expectant management in low-risk women and associated perinatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207 (06) 502.e1-502.e8
21
Snowden JM,
Muoto I,
Darney BG.
, et al. Oregon's Hard-Stop Policy Limiting Elective Early-Term Deliveries: association with obstetric procedure use and health outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 128 (06) 1389-1396
Dieser Artikel wurde in den folgenden Publikationen zitiert. Die Liste wurde aus Crossref-Daten erstellt.
Fonseca Maria João, European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2020; 213. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.08.022 Grobman William A., American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2019; 304. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.02.046