E-ISSN: 2619-9467

Contents    Cover    Publication Date: 24 Dec 2020
Year 2020 - Volume 30 - Issue 4

Open Access

Peer Reviewed

ORIGINAL RESEARCH
677 Viewed497 Downloaded

Factors Affecting Successful Vaginal Birth Following Dinoprostone Administration in Post-term Pregnancies

  
J Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2020;30(4):136-40
DOI: 10.5336/jcog.2020-77451
Article Language: EN
Copyright Ⓒ 2020 by Türkiye Klinikleri. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
ABSTRACT
Objective: This study will determine the success rates of the predictive factors of vaginal birth in the post-term labor induction of the cervical ripening slow-release insert dinoprostone. Material and Methods: All patients who underwent labor induction were post-term pregnant patients. Post-term pregnancy was defined as lasting ≥42+0 weeks of gestation. Dinoprostone insertion into the posterior fornix was performed according to the Bishop score (≤6) and maintained for a maximum of 24 hours. Parity, Bishop score, maternal age, fetal gender, and induction time were identified as candidate predictors. The traditional logistic regression method was used to examine the relationship between the outcome and candidate predictors. Discrimination in the model was evaluated by calculating the c-index. Results: Of the 25,678 deliveries that occurred during the study period, 361 (1.4%) women underwent post-term delivery; of these, 293 (81%) succeeded, and 68 (19%) failed to achieve cervical ripening using the dinoprostone slow-release vaginal insert. Three predictors were strongly associated with dinoprostone vaginal delivery success: multiparity (2.88[1.38-6.01]), fetal gender (1.69[0.9-3.0]), and Bishop score (OR: 1.59 [1.45'1.70]). Conclusion: The success of vaginal delivery can be predicted by evaluating factors, including fetal gender, parity, and the Bishop score in post-term pregnancies. Including these factors in the management protocol for labor induction with cervical ripening could improve care quality.
REFERENCES:
  1. 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(1):222-7.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  2. Lawn JE, Blencowe H, Waiswa P, et al. Stillbirths: rates, risk factors, and acceleration towards 2030. Lancet. 2016;387(10018): 587-603.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  3. WHO recommendations: Induction of labour at or beyond term. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018.[Link] 
  4. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice bulletin no. 146: Management of late-term and post-term pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(2 Pt 1):390-6.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  5. Middleton P, Shepherd E, Crowther CA. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5(5):CD004945.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  6. WHO Recommendations for Induction of Labour. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.[Link] 
  7. Leduc D, Biringer A, Lee L, Dy J; clinical practice obstetrics committee, special contributors. Induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35(9):840-57.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  8. Batinelli L, Serafini A, Nante N, Petraglia F, Severi FM, Messina G. Induction of labour: clinical predictive factors for success and failure. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;38(3):352-8.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  9. Modrzyńska A, Radoń-Pokracka M, Płonka M, et al. Labor induction at full-term and post-term pregnancies. Folia Med Cracov. 2019;59(4): 79-94.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  10. Farina A, Bernabini D, Rapacchia G, et al. Vaginal delivery rate in post-term pregnancies with one versus more than one dinoprostone gel administrations: an observational study. Minerva Ginecol. 2013;65(5):567-75.[PubMed] 
  11. Migliorelli F, Ba-os N, Angeles MA, et al. Clinical and Sonographic Model to Predict Cesarean Delivery after Induction of Labor at Term. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2019;46(2):88-96.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  12. Riboni F, Garofalo G, Pascoli I, et al. Labour induction at term: clinical, biophysical and molecular predictive factors. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012;286(5):1123-9.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  13. Uyar Y, Erbay G, Demir BC, Baytur Y. Comparison of the Bishop score, body mass index and transvaginal cervical length in predicting the success of labor induction. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009;280(3):357-62.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  14. Kolkman DG, Verhoeven CJ, Brinkhorst SJ, et al. The Bishop score as a predictor of labor induction success: a systematic review. Am J Perinatol. 2013;30(8):625-30[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  15. Gonen R, Degani S, Ron A. Prediction of successful induction of labor: comparison of transvaginal ultrasonography and the Bishop score. Eur J Ultrasound. 1998;7(3):183-7.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  16. Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. The value of ultrasound in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;24(5):538-49.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  17. Rovas L, Sladkevicius P, Strobel E, Valentin L. Three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound assessment of the cervix for the prediction of successful induction of labor with prostaglandin in prolonged pregnancy. J Ultrasound Med. 2005;24(7):933-9.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  18. Roman H, Verspyck E, Vercoustre L, et al. The role of ultrasound and fetal fibronectin in predicting the length of induced labor when the cervix is unfavourable. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23(6):567-73.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  19. Parkes I, Kabiri D, Hants Y, Ezra Y. The indication for induction of labor impacts the risk of cesarean delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(2):224-8.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  20. Ashwal E, Hadar E, Chen R, Aviram A, Hiersch L, Gabbay-Benziv R. Effect of fetal gender on the induction of labor failure rates. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017;30(24): 3009-13.[Crossref] [PubMed] 
  21. Tolcher MC, Holbert MR, Weaver AL, et al. Predicting cesarean delivery after induction of labor among nulliparous women at term. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(5):1059-68.[Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC] 
  22. Levine LD, Downes KL, Parry S, Elovitz MA, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. A validated calculator to estimate the risk of cesarean after induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix [published correction appears in Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 May 22:]. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(2):254.e1-254.e7.[Crossref] [PubMed] [PMC] 
  23. Harrell Jr, Frank E. Regression modelling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic and ordinal regression, and survival analysis. Springer, 2015.[Crossref]