Vol. 6 (04) pp. 996-1005 DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/6941

MISOPROSTOL INDUCTION OF LABOR IN MULTIPARA PREGNANT WOMEN: A MINI-SURVEY FOR PREDICTORS OF OUTCOME.

and
  • Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Benha University, Egypt.
5 Downloads 180 Views
Crossref

Download Full Paper (PDF)

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate dose-related outcome of induction of labor (IOL) using misoprostol vaginal inserts (MVI) in multipara pregnant women so as to determine the appropriate dose for getting trial success defined as having vaginal delivery (VD) within 24-hr induction-to-delivery (ITD) interval. Patients & Methods: 644 pregnant women underwent clinical evaluation and vaginal examination to determine Bishop score using the Simplified Bishop Score (SBS). All women received 25 ?g MVI only once and were monitored for labor progress as judged by SBS and uterine contractions with fetal heart monitoring. In absence of fetal distress manifestations and membranes were still intact, but uterine contractions occurred <3 times/10 minutes, another MVI was used for a maximum of 6 doses. Uterine contraction augmentation was provided as amniotomy or/and oxytocin infusion started 4-hrs after the last MVI was placed. Study outcomes included trail success rate, number of MVI used, frequency and mode of augmentation and delivery assistance. Results: 530 women (82.3%) had VD; 159 women without augmentation, 182 women had amniotomy, 105 women received oxytocin drip and 84 women required both. Only 168 women (26.1%) had instrumentally-assisted VD. Mean ITD interval was 10.9?6.3 hr; 492 women had ITD interval <24 hr for a trial success rate of 76.4%. Cesarean section was indicted in 114 women (17.7%). Only 29 women received four, 71 three, 93 two, while 451 women received one MVI, VD rate was significantly (p<0.00001) lower among women received higher number of MVI. Statistical analyses defined high MVI dose and BMI as negative, while high parity is a positive significant predictor for trial success. High MVI dose and BMI are positive, while high SBS and high parity are negative significant predictors for long ITD interval. Kaplan-Meier regression analysis defined the appropriate MVI for IOL trial success at a mean dose of 1.5?0.039 (95% CI: 1.4-1.55). Conclusion: MVI is a satisfactory modality for IOL trial in multipara pregnant women with VD rate of 82.3% and ITD interval of <24-hr in 76.4%. Lower BMI and higher number of previous VD indicate higher possibility of trial success. SBS is appropriate for women selection for trial and follow-up and can predict outcome if combined with BMI, parity and number of MVI used.

How to Cite This Article

Ayman A. Shedid and Hesham M. Abo Ragab. (2018); MISOPROSTOL INDUCTION OF LABOR IN MULTIPARA PREGNANT WOMEN: A MINI-SURVEY FOR PREDICTORS OF OUTCOME., International Journal of Advanced Research (IJAR), 6 (04), 996-1005, ISSN 2320-5407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/6941

Corresponding Author

Hesham M. Abo Ragab
Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Benha University, Egypt.

Article Analytics

References

  1. Peters LL, Thornton C, de Jonge A, Khashan A, Tracy M, Downe S, Feijen-de Jong EI, Dahlen HG: The effect of medical and operative birth interventions on child health outcomes in the first 28?days and up to 5?years of age: A linked data population-based cohort study. Birth. 2018 Mar 25. doi: 10.1111/birt.12348. [Epub ahead of print]
  2. Alberola-Rubio J, Garcia-Casado J, Prats-Boluda G, Ye-Lin Y, Desantes D, Valero J, Perales A: Prediction of labor onset type: Spontaneous vs induced; role of electrohysterography? Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2017;144:127-133.
  3. Levine LD, Downes KL, Parry S, Elovitz MA, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK: A validated calculator to estimate risk of cesarean after an induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Feb;218(2):254.e1-254.e7.
  4. Zizzo AR, Kirkegaard I, Pinborg A, Ulbjerg N: Decline in stillbirths and perinatal mortality after implementation of a more aggressive induction policy in post-date pregnancies: a nationwide register study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017; 96(7):862-867.
  5. Knight HE, Cromwell DA, Gurol-Urganci I, Harron K, van der Meulen JH, Smith GCS: Perinatal mortality associated with induction of labour versus expectant management in nulliparous women aged 35 years or over: An English national cohort study. PLoS Med. 2017; 14(11):e1002425.
  6. Gibbs Pickens CM, Kramer MR, Howards PP, Badell ML, Caughey AB, Hogue CJ: Term Elective Induction of Labor and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Obese Women and Their Offspring. Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jan;131(1):12-22.
  7. Panelius E, Heikinheimo O, Rahkonen L: Foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol for labour induction. Duodecim. 2012;128(20):2093-102.
  8. Levine LD, Downes KL, Elovitz MA, Parry S, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK: Mechanical and Pharmacologic Methods of Labor Induction: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 128(6):1357-1364.
  9. Boyon C, Monsarrat N, Clouqueur E, Deruelle P: Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2014; 42(10):674-80.
  10. Stephenson ML, Wing DA: Misoprostol for induction of labor. Semin Perinatol. 2015; 39(6):459-62.
  11. Alfirevic Z, Aflaifel N, Weeks A: Oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; (6):CD001338.
  12. Clouqueur E, Coulon C, Vaast P, Chauvet A, Deruelle P, Subtil D, Houfflin-Debarge V: Use of misoprostol for induction of labor in case of fetal death or termination of pregnancy during second or third trimester of pregnancy: Efficiency, dosage, route of administration, side effects, use in case of uterine scar. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2014; 43(2):146-61.
  13. Zangeneh M, Malek-Khosravi S, Veisi F, Rezavand N, Rezaee M, Rajatee M: Multiple-dose vaginal misoprostol and single-dose misoprostol plus oxytocin for termination of second-trimester pregnancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012; 117(1):78-80.
  14. Laughon SK, Zhang J, Troendle J, Sun L, Reddy UM: Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117(4):805-11.
  15. http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_healt h/augmentation-?‐labour/en/.2014
  16. Royal Collage of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Active labor management. Query bank. 2011 Vurdert 20. September 2012
  17. Hofmeyr GJ, G?lmezoglu AM, Pileggi C: Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour (review). London: Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2010.
  18. Raghuraman N, Stout MJ, Young OM, Tuuli MG, L?pez JD, Macones GA, Cahill AG: Utility of the Simplified Bishop Score in Spontaneous Labor. Am J Perinatol. 2016; 33(12):1176-81.
  19. Sievert RA, Kuper SG, Jauk VC, Parrish M, Biggio JR, Harper LM: Predictors of vaginal delivery in medically indicated early preterm induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 217(3):375.e1-375.e7.
  20. Hern?ndez Mart?nez A, Molina-Alarc?n M, Pascual-Pedre?o AI, Ba?o-Garn?s AB, Redondo Gonzalez O, G?mez Salgado J: Predictive validity of Bishop and Burnett Scores for vaginal delivery modified by parity. An Sist Sanit Navar. 2017; 40(3):351-360.
  21. Mbaluka CM, Kamau K, Karanja JG, Mugo N: Effectiveness and safety of 2-hourly 20 mcg oral misoprostol solution compared to standard intravenous oxytocin in labour induction due to pre-labour rupture of membranes at term: a randomised clinical trial at Kenyatta National Hospital. East Afr Med J. 2014; 91(9):303-10.
  22. Silva TAG, Borges J?nior LE, Tahan LA, Costa TFA, Magalh?es FO, Peixoto AB, Martins WP, Araujo J?nior E: Induction of Labor using Misoprostol in a Tertiary Hospital in the Southeast of Brazil. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2017;39(10):523-528.
  23. Garba I, Muhammed AS, Muhammad Z, Galadanci HS, Ayyuba R, Abubakar IS: Induction to delivery interval using transcervical Foley catheter plus oxytocin and vaginal misoprostol: A comparative study at Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria. Ann Afr Med. 2016; 15(3):114-9.
  24. Grobman WA, Bailit J, Lai Y, Reddy UM, Wapner RJ, Varner MW, Thorp JM Jr, Leveno KJ, Caritis SN, Prasad M, Tita ATN, Saade G, Sorokin Y, Rouse DJ, Blackwell SC, Tolosa JE; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network: Defining failed induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(1):122.e1-122.e8.
  25. Liu A, Lv J, Hu Y, Lang J, Ma L, Chen W: Efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for labor induction at term: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014; 40(4):897-906.
  26. de Paiva Marques RM, Souza AS, de Lucena Feitosa FE, da Costa AA, Amorim MM: Maternal and perinatal outcomes in women with and without hypertensive syndromes submitted to induction of labor with misoprostol. Hypertens Pregnancy. 2017; 36(1):1-7.
  27. Burgos J, Arana I, Garitano I, Rodr?guez L, Cobos P, Osuna C, Del Mar Centeno M, Fern?ndez-Llebrez L: Induction of labor in breech presentation at term: a retrospective cohort study. J Perinat Med. 2017; 45(3):299-303.
  28. Navve D, Orenstein N, Ribak R, Daykan Y, Shechter-Maor G, Biron-Shental T: Is the Bishop-score significant in predicting the success of labor induction in multiparous women? J Perinatol. 2017; 37(5):480-483.
  29. Kawakita T, Grantz KL, Landy HJ, Huang CC, Kominiarek MA: Induction of Labor in Women with Oligohydramnios: Misoprostol Compared with Prostaglandin E2.
  30. Bierut A, Dowgiałło-Smolarczyk J, Pieniążek I, Stelmachowski J, Pacocha K, Sobkowski M, Baev OR, Walczak J: Misoprostol Vaginal Insert in Labor Induction: A Cost-Consequences Model for 5 European Countries-An Economic Evaluation Supported with Literature Review and Retrospective Data Collection. Adv Ther. 2016; 33(10):1755-1770.
  31. Pimentel VM, Arabkhazaeli M, Moon JY, Wang A, Kapedani A, Bernstein PS, Tropper PJ: Induction of Labor Using One Dose versus Multiple Doses of Misoprostol - A Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Mar 31. pii: S0002-9378(18)30249-7.
  32. Marroquin GA, Tudorica N, Salafia CM, Hecht R, Mikhail M: Induction of labor at 41 weeks of pregnancy among primiparas with an unfavorable Bishop score. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013; 288(5):989-93.
  33. Roloff K, Peng S, Sanchez-Ramos L, Valenzuela GJ: Cumulative oxytocin dose during induction of labor according to maternal body mass index. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015; 131(1):54-8.
  34. Lassiter JR, Holliday N, Lewis DF, Mulekar M, Abshire J, Brocato B: Induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix: how does BMI affect success? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016; 29(18):3000-2.
  35. Prado CA, Araujo J?nior E, Duarte G, Quintana SM, Tonni G, Cavalli Rde C, Marcolin AC: Predicting success of labor induction in singleton term pregnancies by combining maternal and ultrasound variables. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016; 29(21):3511-8.
  36. Al-Adwy AM, Sobh SM, Belal DS, Omran EF, Hassan A, Saad AH, Afifi MM, Nada AM: Diagnostic accuracy of posterior cervical angle and cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018 April; 141(1):102-7.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.