Induction of labor Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2018;40(9):513-517
Induction of labor (IL) is a common obstetric procedure, but it is questionable whether or not it results in higher cesarean section (CS) rates. The present study aims to evaluate the impact of IL in the overall CS rates and to analyze these rates according to the method of IL employed and to the Robson group in which it was applied.
We have conducted a retrospective study including pregnant women whose labor was induced at a tertiary hospital in 2015 and 2016. All women were classified according to the Robson Classification System (RCS). The CS rates were analyzed and compared regarding the method of IL employed.
A total of 1,166 cases were included. The CS rate after IL was 20.9%, which represented 23.1% of the total of CSs performed in 2015 and 2016. The highest CS rates were recorded in RCS groups 5 (65.2%) and 8 (32.3%). Group 2 was the highest contributor to the overall CS rate, since it represented 56.7% of the population. The intravaginal prostaglandins method was the most used (77%). Transcervical Foley catheter was the preferredmethod in group 5 and intravaginal prostaglandins in all the other groups. The CS rate was higher when transcervical Foley catheter was used (34.1%).
Transcervical Foley catheter induction was associated with a higher rate of CS, probably because it was the preferred method used in group 5.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2018;40(9):513-517
Induction of labor (IL) is a common obstetric procedure, but it is questionable whether or not it results in higher cesarean section (CS) rates. The present study aims to evaluate the impact of IL in the overall CS rates and to analyze these rates according to the method of IL employed and to the Robson group in which it was applied.
We have conducted a retrospective study including pregnant women whose labor was induced at a tertiary hospital in 2015 and 2016. All women were classified according to the Robson Classification System (RCS). The CS rates were analyzed and compared regarding the method of IL employed.
A total of 1,166 cases were included. The CS rate after IL was 20.9%, which represented 23.1% of the total of CSs performed in 2015 and 2016. The highest CS rates were recorded in RCS groups 5 (65.2%) and 8 (32.3%). Group 2 was the highest contributor to the overall CS rate, since it represented 56.7% of the population. The intravaginal prostaglandins method was the most used (77%). Transcervical Foley catheter was the preferredmethod in group 5 and intravaginal prostaglandins in all the other groups. The CS rate was higher when transcervical Foley catheter was used (34.1%).
Transcervical Foley catheter induction was associated with a higher rate of CS, probably because it was the preferred method used in group 5.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 1998;20(8):457-462
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72031998000800005
Objective: to determine the efficacy and safety of misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor in pregnant women at term when compared with placebo. Patients and Methods: fifty-one high-risk pregnant women at term, with unripe cervix, were allocated in a double-blind trial for treatment with intravaginal misoprostol (40 mg, 4/4 h) or intravaginal placebo. Results: thirty-two patients received misoprostol and 19 received placebo. The groups were homogeneous concerning maternal age, gestacional age, parity, and indication for induction (p > 0.05). In the misoprostol group the efficacy was 87.5% and in the placebo group 21.1% (p = 0.0000087). Regarding delivery, in the misoprostol group 75% had vaginal delivery and 25% abdominal delivery, and in the placebo group only 32% had vaginal delivery and 68% abdominal delivery (p = 0.0059).The Apgar score was similar. Conclusion: in this study misoprostol was effective and safe for cervical ripening and induction of labor.
Summary
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 1998;20(8):457-462
DOI 10.1590/S0100-72031998000800005
Objective: to determine the efficacy and safety of misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor in pregnant women at term when compared with placebo. Patients and Methods: fifty-one high-risk pregnant women at term, with unripe cervix, were allocated in a double-blind trial for treatment with intravaginal misoprostol (40 mg, 4/4 h) or intravaginal placebo. Results: thirty-two patients received misoprostol and 19 received placebo. The groups were homogeneous concerning maternal age, gestacional age, parity, and indication for induction (p > 0.05). In the misoprostol group the efficacy was 87.5% and in the placebo group 21.1% (p = 0.0000087). Regarding delivery, in the misoprostol group 75% had vaginal delivery and 25% abdominal delivery, and in the placebo group only 32% had vaginal delivery and 68% abdominal delivery (p = 0.0059).The Apgar score was similar. Conclusion: in this study misoprostol was effective and safe for cervical ripening and induction of labor.
