RSS-Feed abonnieren
![](/products/assets/desktop/img/oa-logo.png)
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-107672
Induction of Labour in Late and Postterm Pregnancies and its Impact on Maternal and Neonatal Outcome
Die Geburtseinleitung bei übertragener Schwangerschaft und die Auswirkungen auf mütterliches und kindliches OutcomePublikationsverlauf
received 28. Februar 2016
revised 11. April 2016
accepted 28. April 2016
Publikationsdatum:
20. Juli 2016 (online)
![](https://www.thieme-connect.de/media/gebfra/201607/lookinside/thumbnails/10-1055-s-0042-107672_gf1067-1.jpg)
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to determine the effects of induction of labour in late-term pregnancies on the mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcome. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed deliveries between 2000 and 2014 at the University Hospital of Cologne. Women with a pregnancy aged between 41 + 0 to 42 + 6 weeks were included. Those who underwent induction of labour were compared with women who were expectantly managed. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were evaluated. Results: 856 patients were included into the study. The rate of cesarean deliveries was significantly higher for the induction of labour group (33.8 vs. 21.1 %, p < 0.001). Aside from the more frequent occurrence of perineal lacerations (induction of labour group vs. expectantly managed group = 38.1 % compared with 26.4 %, p = 0.002) and all types of lacerations (induction of labour group vs. expectantly managed group = 61.5% vs. 52.2 %, p = 0.021) in women with vaginal delivery, there were no significant differences in maternal outcome. Besides, no differences regarding neonatal outcome were observed. Conclusions: Our study suggests that induction of labour in late and postterm pregnancies is associated with a significantly higher cesarean section rate. Other maternal and fetal parameters were not influenced by induction of labour.
Zusammenfassung
Einleitung: Diese Studie untersuchte die Auswirkungen der Geburtseinleitung in der Spätschwangerschaft bzw. bei Übertragung auf die Art der Entbindung sowie auf das mütterliche und kindliche Outcome. Methoden: Alle in der Universitätsklinik Köln zwischen 2000 und 2014 erfolgten Entbindungen wurden retrospektiv untersucht. Alle Frauen, die in der 41 + 0 bis 42 + 6 Schwangerschaftswoche entbanden, wurden in die Studie eingeschlossen. Schwangere Frauen, bei denen eine Geburtseinleitung durchgeführt wurde, wurden mit Frauen verglichen, die exspektativ behandelt wurden. Die mütterlichen und kindlichen Outcomes wurden ausgewertet. Ergebnisse: Es wurden insgesamt 856 Patientinnen in die Studie aufgenommen. Die Kaiserschnittrate war in der Geburtseinleitungs-Gruppe signifikant höher (33.8 vs. 21.1 %, p < 0.001). Abgesehen von einem häufigeren Auftreten von Dammrissen (Geburtseinleitungs-Gruppe vs. Gruppe mit exspektativem Vorgehen = 38,1 vs. 26,4 %; p = 0,002) sowie aller Arten von Risswunden (Geburtseinleitungs-Gruppe vs. Gruppe mit exspektativem Vorgehen = 61,5 vs. 52,2 %; p = 0,021) bei Frauen, die vaginal entbanden, gab es keine wesentlichen Unterschiede im mütterlichen Outcome. Es gab auch keine signifikanten Unterschiede im Neugeborenen-Outcome zwischen den beiden Gruppen. Schlussfolgerung: Unsere Studie zeigte, dass die Geburtseinleitung bei Terminüberschreitung und Übertragung mit einer signifikant höheren Sectio-Rate verbunden ist. Die Geburtseinleitung führte zu keiner Änderung hinsichtlich anderer mütterlichen und fetalen Faktoren.
*
* Equally contributing authors
-
References
- 1 ACOG. ACOG practice patterns. Management of postterm pregnancy. Number 6, October 1997. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1998; 60: 86-91
- 2 Norwitz ER, Snegovskikh VV, Caughey AB. Prolonged pregnancy: when should we intervene?. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2007; 50: 547-557
- 3 Laursen M, Bille C, Olesen AW et al. Genetic influence on prolonged gestation: a population-based Danish twin study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190: 489-494
- 4 Stotland NE, Washington AE, Caughey AB. Prepregnancy body mass index and the length of gestation at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197: 378.e1-378.e5
- 5 ACOG. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114 (2 Pt 1) 386-397
- 6 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Induction of Labour, NICE Clinical guideline 70. Online: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg70/resources/guidance-induction-of-labour-pdf last access: 01.10.2014
- 7 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. Leitlinie Vorgehen bei Terminüberschreitung und Übertragung [updated 2014 Oct 22]. Online: http://www.awmf.org/uploads/tx_szleitlinien/015-065l_S1_Termin%25C3%25BCberschreitung_%25C3%259Cbertragung_02-2014.pdf last access: 22.10.2014
- 8 Daskalakis G, Zacharakis D, Simou M et al. Induction of labor versus expectant management for pregnancies beyond 41 weeks. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2014; 27: 173-176
- 9 Hutcheon J, Harper S, Strumpf E et al. Using inter-institutional practice variation to understand the risks and benefits of routine labour induction at 41(+0) weeks. BJOG 2015; 122: 973-981
- 10 Wood S, Cooper S, Ross S. Does induction of labour increase the risk of caesarean section? A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials in women with intact membranes. BJOG 2014; 121: 674-685 discussion 685
- 11 Wolfe H, Timofeev J, Tefera E et al. Risk of cesarean in obese nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix: elective induction vs. expectant management at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211: 53.e1-53.e5
- 12 Vrouenraets FP, Roumen FJ, Dehing CJ et al. Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105: 690-697
- 13 Caughey AB, Sundaram V, Kaimal AJ et al. Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 252-263 W53–W63
- 14 Chanrachakul B, Herabutya Y. Postterm with favorable cervix: is induction necessary?. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003; 106: 154-157
- 15 Osmundson S, Ou-Yang RJ, Grobman WA. Elective induction compared with expectant management in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 583-587
- 16 Wang M, Fontaine P. Common questions about late-term and postterm pregnancy. Am Fam Physician 2014; 90: 160-165
- 17 Alexander JM, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Forty weeks and beyond: pregnancy outcomes by week of gestation. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96: 291-294
- 18 Caughey AB, Stotland NE, Washington AE et al. Maternal and obstetric complications of pregnancy are associated with increasing gestational age at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196: 155.e1-155.e6
- 19 Cheng YW, Nicholson JM, Nakagawa S et al. Perinatal outcomes in low-risk term pregnancies: do they differ by week of gestation?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199: 370.e1-370.e7
- 20 Bruckner TA, Cheng YW, Caughey AB. Increased neonatal mortality among normal-weight births beyond 41 weeks of gestation in California. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199: 421.e1-421.e7
- 21 Olesen AW, Westergaard JG, Olsen J. Perinatal and maternal complications related to postterm delivery: a national register-based study, 1978–1993. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 222-227
- 22 Nakling J, Backe B. Pregnancy risk increases from 41 weeks of gestation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006; 85: 663-668
- 23 Hilder L, Sairam S, Thilaganathan B. Influence of parity on fetal mortality in prolonged pregnancy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 132: 167-170
- 24 Ingemarsson I, Källén K. Stillbirths and rate of neonatal deaths in 76,761 postterm pregnancies in Sweden, 1982–1991: a register study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1997; 76: 658-662
- 25 Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hellmann J et al. Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. The Canadian Multicenter Post-term Pregnancy Trial Group. N Engl J Med 1992; 326: 1587-1592
- 26 Hermus MA, Verhoeven CJ, Mol BW et al. Comparison of induction of labour and expectant management in postterm pregnancy: a matched cohort study. J Midwifery Womens Health 2009; 54: 351-356
- 27 Hernández-Martínez A, Pascual-Pedreño AI, Baño-Garnés AB et al. Relation between induced labour indications and neonatal morbidity. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2014; 290: 1093-1099
- 28 Prysak M. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor: a case-control analysis of safety and efficacy. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92: 47-52
- 29 van Gemund N, Hardeman A, Scherjon SA et al. Intervention rates after elective induction of labor compared to labor with a spontaneous onset. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2003; 56: 133-138
- 30 Katz Z, Yemini M, Lancet M et al. Non-aggressive management of post-date pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1983; 15: 71-79
- 31 Boulvain M, Marcoux S, Bureau M et al. Risks of induction of labour in uncomplicated term pregnancies. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2001; 15: 131-138
- 32 Roach VJ, Rogers MS. Pregnancy outcome beyond 41 weeks gestation. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1997; 59: 19-24
- 33 Stock SJ, Ferguson E, Duffy A et al. Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study. BMJ 2012; 344: e2838
- 34 Witter FR, Weitz CM. A randomized trial of induction at 42 weeks gestation versus expectant management for postdates pregnancies. Am J Perinatol 1987; 4: 206-211
- 35 Nielsen PE, Howard BC, Hill CC et al. Comparison of elective induction of labor with favorable Bishop scores versus expectant management: a randomized clinical trial. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2005; 18: 59-64
- 36 Heimstad R, Skogvoll E, Mattsson L et al. Induction of labor or serial antenatal fetal monitoring in postterm pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109: 609-617
- 37 Parry E, Parry D, Pattison N. Induction of labour for post term pregnancy: an observational study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 38: 275-280
- 38 James C, George SS, Gaunekar N et al. Management of prolonged pregnancy: a randomized trial of induction of labour and antepartum foetal monitoring. Natl Med J India 2001; 14: 270-273
- 39 Crane JM. Factors predicting labor induction success: a critical analysis. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006; 49: 573-584
- 40 Heffner L. Impact of labor induction, gestational age, and maternal age on cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102: 287-293
- 41 Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, Pateisky N et al. Influence of labor induction on obstetric outcomes in patients with prolonged pregnancy. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2005; 117: 287-292
- 42 Wennerholm U, Hagberg H, Brorsson B et al. Induction of labor versus expectant management for post-date pregnancy: is there sufficient evidence for a change in clinical practice?. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009; 88: 6-17
- 43 Gülmezoglu AM, Crowther CA, Middleton P et al. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; (6) CD004945
- 44 Khireddine I, Le Ray C, Dupont C et al. Induction of labor and risk of postpartum hemorrhage in low risk parturients. PloS one 2013; 8: e54858
- 45 Mandruzzato G, Alfirevic Z, Chervenak F et al. Guidelines for the management of postterm pregnancy. J Perinat Med 2010; 38: 111-119