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. Induction of labor compared with expectant management for prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. TERMPROM Study Group. Elective induction of labour. A randomised prospective trial. Comparison of induced versus non-induced labor in post-term pregnancy. A randomized prospective study. A randomised trial of two expectant managements of prelabour rupture of the membranes at 34 to 42 weeks. Prelabour rupture of the membranes at term--no advantage of delaying induction for 24 hours. Controlled comparison of induction versus expectant care for prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. Induction versus expectant management in premature rupture of the membranes with mature amniotic fluid at 32 to 36 weeks: a randomized trial. Induction of labor with three different techniques at 41 weeks of gestation or spontaneous follow-up until 42 weeks in women with definitely unfavorable cervical scores. A clinical trial of induction of labor versus expectant management in postterm pregnancy. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Network of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units. Induction of labor or serial antenatal fetal monitoring in postterm pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Misoprostol versus expectant management in premature rupture of membranes at term. Randomised trial of outpatient induction of labor with vaginal PGE2 at 40-41 weeks of gestation versus expectant management. No benefit from conservative management in nulliparous women with premature rupture of the membranes (PROM) at term. A randomized study. Management of prelabor rupture of membranes at term. A randomized study. Prelabour rupture of membranes at term: early induction of labour versus expectant management. A randomised controlled trial and meta-analysis of active management of labour.
The rates of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity are higher for post-term pregnancies than for term pregnancies. It is not known, however, whether the induction of labor results in better outcomes than does serial fetal monitoring while awaiting spontaneous labor.
                We studied 3407 women with uncomplicated pregnancies of 41 or more weeks' duration. The women were randomly assigned to undergo induction of labor or to have serial antenatal monitoring and spontaneous labor unless there was evidence of fetal or maternal compromise, in which case labor was induced or cesarean section was performed. In the induction group, labor was induced by the intracervical application of prostaglandin E2. Serial antenatal monitoring consisted of counts of fetal kicks, nonstress tests, and assessments of amniotic-fluid volume. The outcomes we measured were the rates of perinatal mortality, neonatal morbidity, and delivery by cesarean section.
                Among the 1701 women in the induction group, 360 (21.2 percent) underwent cesarean section, as compared with 418 (24.5 percent) of the 1706 women in the monitoring group (P = 0.03). This difference resulted from a lower rate of cesarean section performed because of fetal distress among the women in the induction group (5.7 percent vs. 8.3 percent, P = 0.003). When two infants with lethal congenital anomalies were excluded, there were no perinatal deaths in the induction group and two stillbirths in the monitoring group (P not significant). The frequency of neonatal morbidity was similar in the two groups.
                In post-term pregnancy, the induction of labor results in a lower rate of cesarean section than serial antenatal monitoring; the rates of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity are similar with the two approaches to management. As the interval between rupture of the fetal membranes at term and delivery increases, so may the risk of fetal and maternal infection. It is not known whether inducing labor will reduce this risk or whether one method of induction is better then another.
                We studied 5041 women with prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. The women were randomly assigned to induction of labor with intravenous oxytocin; induction of labor with vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel; or expectant management for up to four days, with labor induced with either intravenous oxytocin or vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel if complications developed. The primary outcome was neonatal infection. Secondary outcomes were the need for cesarean section and women's evaluations of their treatment.
                The rates of neonatal infection and cesarean section were not significantly different among the study groups. The rates of neonatal infection were 2.0 percent for the induction-with-oxytocin group, 3.0 percent for the induction-with-prostaglandin group, 2.8 percent for the expectant-management (oxytocin) group, and 2.7 percent for the expectant-management (prostaglandin) group. The rates of cesarean section ranged from 9.6 to 10.9 percent. Clinical chorioamnionitis was less likely to develop in the women in the induction-with-oxytocin group than in those in the expectant-management (oxytocin) group (4.0 percent vs. 8.6 percent, P<0.001), as was postpartum fever (1.9 percent vs. 3.6 percent, P=0.008). Women in the induction groups were less likely to say they liked "nothing" about their treatment than those in the expectant-management groups.
                In women with prelabor rupture of the membranes at term, induction of labor with oxytocin or prostaglandin E2 and expectant management result in similar rates of neonatal infection and cesarean section. Induction of labor with intravenous oxytocin results in a lower risk of maternal infection than does expectant management. Women view induction of labor more positively than expectant management. In a prospective, randomised trial, 111 obstetrically normal pregnant women, who had elective induction of labour performed between 39 and 40 weeks, were compared with 117 controls who were managed expectantly until 41 weeks. Compared with the controls, the patients who had elective induction of labour had significantly less meconium staining in labour and a smaller blood-loss after delivery. The mean length of labour, the amount of pethidine used, and the Apgar scores at 1 minute were similar in the two groups. In the electively induced group, the caesarean-section rate was lower and the use of epidural analgesia more common than in the controls, but the differences were mot statistically signficant. The hour of delivery was similar in the two groups, suggesting that convenience to medical and nursing staff would not be greatly changed by elective induction of labour. There was no evidence that the hazards to mother and child were increased by elective induction, and its use might improve perinatal mortality by reducing the number of unexplained mature stillbirths. To determine the proper management of pregnancy in uncomplicated cases going beyond 42 weeks.
                Randomized controlled trial of induction of labor at or shortly after the 42-week limit, versus close monitoring without induction except when indicated for medical reasons.
                Hospital's obstetrical department
                188 pregnant women, randomly allocated to two groups with 94 in each.
                Induction of labor by stripping of membranes and i.v. oxytocin infusion, with artificial rupture of membranes when the cervical opening was 3 cm or more in diameter. The control group was followed with clinical, biochemical and electronic tests, intervention being applied according to needs.
                Frequency and modes of operative delivery, maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality.
                The distribution of gestational age (in weeks) at birth was almost identical in the two groups, but there were more operative deliveries in the control group than in the induction group (64 versus 48, p less than 0.05). Maternal complications and perinatal morbidity rates were equally distributed between the groups. There was one perinatal death in the induction group and two deaths among the controls.
                With due reservation for small numbers, routine induction after term may result in fewer operative deliveries. No other advantage has been demonstrated when compared with close monitoring and intervention when medically indicated. To compare obstetric and perinatal outcome between two different expectant managements in women with prelabour rupture of the membranes (PROM).
                A randomised study.
                One thousand three hundred and eighty-five women with rupture of the membranes at 34 to 42 weeks without contractions.
                Women without contractions 2 h after admission were randomised to early induction the following morning after PROM (early induction group) or induction two days later (late induction group). Women with contractions starting within 2 h after admission were included in the calculations as a short latency group. Digital examinations of the cervix were avoided until onset of active labour. Labour was induced with oxytocin in both groups if no spontaneous contractions occurred or if chorioamnionitis or fetal distress was detected.
                The frequency of spontaneous deliveries, operative deliveries, maternal and neonatal infections.
                In nulliparous women, a higher rate of spontaneous deliveries was found in the late induction group (89%) compared with the early induction group (81%) (P < 0.05). The ventouse extraction rate was 7% and 14% respectively (P < 0.05). A low (2-4%) caesarean section rate was recorded and did not differ between the groups. Endometritis was detected in six women after delivery. Sixty-one children were treated with antibiotics, and no difference could be detected between the groups.
                A higher rate of spontaneous deliveries was found among nulliparous women with prolonged latency as compared with brief latency prior to induction. A protocol of no digital examination before labour was associated with infrequent maternal and fetal morbidity, regardless of latency. We performed a prospective randomized study to compare maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancies with prelabour rupture of the membranes (PROM) at term with early induction of labour or expectant management, 126 women with singleton pregnancy, cephalic presentation and gestational duration > or = 37 weeks, were randomized either to immediate induction of labour with oxytocin (Group 1) (n=52), or conservative management (Group 2) (n=74). Women who constituted Group 2 were divided into 2 groups. The first group (Group 2A) (n=25) included women in whom spontaneous labour did not begin after a waiting period of 24 hours, in which case labour was induced with oxytocin i.e. expectant management. The second group consisted of women (Group 2B) (n=49) in whom labour began spontaneously within 24 hours. The base Caesarean section rate was significantly higher in Group 2 (28.4%) (p<0.05). The rates of Caesarean section in the Groups 1-2A-2B were 19.2%, 60%, and 12.2%, respectively for nulliparous and parous women together. The rate of fetal distress was significantly higher in Group 2 (p<0.05). For determining maternal outcomes, the other parameters such as clinical chorioamnionitis, fever before or during labour, receiving antibiotics before or during labour, postpartum fever, analgesia, anaesthesia did not differ in Groups 1 and 2. Women in Group 1 went into active labour sooner, had fewer digital vaginal examinations, had a shorter interval between membrane rupture and delivery, and spent less time in the hospital before delivery than those in Group 2 (p<0.05). Babies in Group 2 were more likely to receive antibiotics, and more likely to stay in an intensive care nursery for more than 24 hours, and more likely to receive ventilation after initial resuscitation than those babies in Group 1. For developing apnoea and hypotonia, there was no significant difference between Groups 1 and 2. However, for babies in Group 2A there was a significant difference. We conclude that immediate induction of labour with oxytocin does not increase the risk of Caesarean section, compared with a practice of expectant management. Women at term with prelabour rupture of the membranes should therefore be reassured that immediate induction with oxytocin currently appears to be the best policy with respect to maternal and neonatal morbidity. This randomized clinical trial compared oxytocin induction of labor with expectant care for 48 hours after prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. Women at term with prelabor rupture of the membranes for at least 8 hours were assigned at random to induction with oxytocin or to expectant management for 48 hours followed by induction if necessary. Of 168 eligible women, 123 (73%) agreed to participate. More women in the induction group (23%) than in the expectant group (10%) had operative delivery, either cesarean section or instrumental vaginal delivery. In the induction group 41% received analgesia versus 24% in the expectant group (p < 0.005). There was no difference in the rate of maternal and neonatal infection between groups and sepsis was not observed. The active policy of oxytocin induction exposed the mother to a higher risk of operative delivery and a less comfortable labor than the 48 hours expectant care option. Our objective was to compare maternal and perinatal outcomes between two management schemes for women with preterm premature rupture of the membranes and documented fetal pulmonary maturity.
                Of 164 women with preterm premature rupture of the membranes at 32 weeks to 36 weeks 6 days' gestation, 93 eligible and consenting women were randomly selected for either induction of labor (n = 46) or expectant management (n = 47). Expectant management included hospitalization, assessment for fetal heart rate abnormalities, chorioamnionitis, and labor. Digital cervical examinations were prohibited until progressive labor occurred. Follow-up was also done for the 71 women who did not participate.
                The women in the induction of labor and expectant management groups had similar demographic characteristics and gestational ages (34.1 vs 34.3 weeks). Expectant management was associated with prolonged latencies to labor, delivery, and maternal hospitalization (p < 0.001), as well as increased hospitalization of infants at 2 to 5 days after delivery (p < 0.05). These patients had increased chorioamnionitis and fetal heart rate abnormalities before labor (p = 0.01, 0.03). Infants received more frequent (p < 0.001) and prolonged antimicrobial therapy after expectant management (p = 0.003) with no reduction in proven sepsis (6.8% vs 4.4%). These latter differences were influenced by the neonatologist's concern over potential neonatal infection.
                Among women with preterm premature rupture of the membranes at 32 to 36 weeks with mature surfactant profiles, immediate induction of labor reduces the duration of hospitalization and infection in both mothers and neonates. To compare the obstetric outcome of induction of labor at 41 weeks and of follow-up until 42 weeks and induction if the patient has still not given birth at 42 weeks.
                Six hundred women at 287+/-1 days of gestation with definitely unfavorable cervical scores were randomized to labor induction (N=300) or spontaneous follow-up (N=300) with twice-weekly nonstress testing and amniotic fluid measurement and once-weekly biophysical scoring. The treatments used in the induction group were (1) vaginal administration of 50 microg misoprostol (n=100), (2) oxytocin induction (n=100), and (3) transcervical insertion of a Foley balloon (n=100). The primary outcome measures were the cesarean delivery rate, whether or not the normal hospital stay had to be extended, and the neonatal outcomes. Secondary outcome measure included number of emergency cesarean deliveries performed for abnormalities of the fetal heart rate (FHR).
                The abdominal delivery rate was 19.3% in the induction group and 22% in the follow-up group (p=0.4). The mean length of hospital stay in the two main groups was 1.4+/-0.8 days and 1.3+/-1 days, respectively (p=0.1). Significantly higher rates of macrosomia and shoulder dystocia were seen in the follow-up group (24.6 and 2.3%) than in the induction group (7.6%, p<0.001; 0.3%, p=0.03). Meconium-stained amniotic fluid and meconium aspiration syndrome were observed significantly less frequently in the induction group (9.3 and 1.3%) than in the follow-up group (20.3%, p<0.001; 4%, p=0.03). Rates of emergency abdominal delivery in response to worrying FHR traces, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and low umblical artery pH were similar in the two groups. There was one intrauterine fetal death in the follow-up group.
                Induction of labor at 41 weeks of gestation does not increase the cesarean delivery rate or cause a longer stay in hospital than follow-up until 42 weeks, and neonatal morbidity is also lower after induction. Management of the uncomplicated pregnancy prolonged beyond the estimated date of confinement is controversial, particularly when the cervix is unfavorable for induction. The benefit of reducing potential fetal risk with induction of labor must be balanced against the morbidity associated with this procedure. The objective of this study was to compare two strategies for managing postterm pregnancy (i.e., immediate induction and expectant management).
                Four hundred forty patients with uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks' gestation were randomized to either immediate induction of labor (n = 265) or expectant management (n = 175). Patients with expectant management underwent nonstress testing and amniotic fluid volume assessment twice per week. Patients in the induction group underwent induction within 24 hours of randomization. To evaluate the efficacy of intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel, patients in the induction group were randomized in a 2:1 scheme to receive either 0.5 mg prostaglandin E2 gel or placebo gel intracervically 12 hours before induction of labor with oxytocin.
                The incidence of adverse perinatal outcome (neonatal seizures, intracranial hemorrhage, the need for mechanical ventilation, or nerve injury) was 1.5% in the induction group and 1% in the expectant management group (p > 0.05). There were no fetal deaths in either group. There were no differences in mean birth weight or the frequency of macrosomia (birth weight > or = 4000 gm) between the two groups (p > 0.05). Regardless of parity, prostaglandin E2 intracervical gel was not more effective than placebo in ripening the cervix. The cesarean delivery rate was not significantly different in the expectant (18%), prostaglandin E2 gel (23%), or placebo gel (18%) groups.
                Adverse perinatal outcome in otherwise uncomplicated pregnancies of > or = 41 weeks is very low with either of the management schemes described. Thus from the perspective of perinatal morbidity or mortality either management scheme is acceptable. To compare induction of labor at gestational age 41 weeks with expectant management in regard to neonatal morbidity. Secondary aims were to assess the effect of these managements on mode of delivery and maternal complications.
                Between September 2002 and July 2004, postterm women with singleton cephalic presentation and no prelabor rupture of membranes were randomly assigned to induction of labor at 289 days or antenatal fetal surveillance every third day until spontaneous labor. Main outcome measures were neonatal morbidity, operative delivery rates, and maternal complications.
                Five hundred eight women were randomly assigned, 254 in each group. No differences of clinical importance were observed in women in whom labor was induced compared with women who were expectantly managed with regard to the following outcomes: neonates whose 5-minute Apgar score was less than 7 (three neonates in the induction group compared with four in the monitoring group, P=.72); neonates whose umbilical cord pH was less than 7 (three compared with two, P=.69); prevalence of cesarean delivery (28 compared with 33, P=.50); or prevalence of operative vaginal delivery (32 compared with 27, P=.49). In the induction group more women had precipitate labors (33 compared with 12, P<.01; number needed to treat was 13), and the duration of second stage of labor was more often less than 15 minutes (94 compared with 56, P<.01; number needed to treat was 7).
                No differences were found between the induced and monitored groups regarding neonatal morbidity or mode of delivery, and the outcomes were generally good.
                ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00385229.
                I. To compare the effectiveness of immediate induction of labour with vaginal misoprostol versus expectant management for 24 hours followed by oxytocin induction in women with premature rupture of membranes at term (term PROM).
                An open, randomised, controlled trial.
                Public university hospital in Campinas City, Brazil.
                One hundred and fifty pregnancies, half of them allocated to each group.
                Statistical analysis used Student's t test, the chi2 test, Fisher's exact test, survival analysis and risk ratio estimates with 95% CI.
                Latency period, recruitment to delivery period, period of hospitalisation, mode of delivery, contractility pattern, fetal wellbeing, labour and delivery complications, neonatal and maternal morbidity.
                Both groups had similar general characteristics, but the misoprostol group had a significantly shorter latency period (9.4 vs 15.8 hours), a shorter time interval from recruitment to delivery (18.9 vs 27.5 hours), a shorter period of maternal hospitalisation and a slightly higher proportion of alterations of contractility when compared with the expectant group. Caesarean section rates were 20% in the misoprostol group and 30.7% in the other. There were no differences between them regarding fetal wellbeing, complications during labour and delivery and neonatal or postpartum maternal morbidity. Within 24 hours, 44% of women had delivered in the expectant group against 73.3% in the misoprostol group.
                Immediate labour induction with misoprostol in cases of term PROM shortens the latency period, the total time between recruitment to delivery and the time of maternal hospitalisation, increasing the occurrence of alterations of contractility without any maternal and perinatal outcomes disadvantages. Two hundred consecutive women with uncomplicated pregnancies, at or within 4 days of their expected date of confinement, were prospectively randomized into 2 groups. One group had expectant management, with twice weekly surveillance tests, while the other group had 3 mg of vaginal prostaglandin E2 as outpatient treatment. There were 104 women in the expectant group and 70 in the induction group (26 women allocated to induction preferred no treatment). The average number of days to delivery was 1.6 in the induction group and 5.2 in the expectant group (p < 0.001). While meconium was much less frequent in the induction group (p < 0.002), all other outcome measures, including cesarean section rates, incidence of macrosomia, and Apgar scores, were similar in the two groups. To compare maternal and fetal outcome in pregnancies with premature rupture of the membranes (PROM) at term with either early induction of labor or conservative management awaiting spontaneous labor.
                A prospective randomized trial.
                The University Hospital of Lund, Sweden.
                Altogether 369 women with singleton pregnancy, cephalic presentation, gestational duration 36-41 weeks, were randomized either to induction of labor (n = 139) or conservative management up to 3 days (n = 138). Those eligible but not participating in the study totalled 92. MAIN OBSTETRIC MEASURES: Obstetric intervention rate (cesarean section or instrumental delivery) and short-term neonatal morbidity.
                No difference was found in the rate of obstetric intervention between the induction of labor group and the group with conservative management (12.2 vs. 18.8%; chi 2 = 2.3, p greater than 0.05). A slightly increased rate of neonatal infections was seen in the latter group (0.7 vs. 4.3%; chi 2 = 3.2, p less than 0.05).
                We found no benefit from conservative management for up to 3 days in women with PROM at term, compared with immediate induction of labor. There was no difference in the number of obstetric interventions during labor. The neonatal infectious morbidity was slightly higher in conservatively managed cases. To compare the rate of obstetric interventions, length of labor, and maternal morbidity in pregnancies with prelabor rupture of membranes at term after either early or late induction of labor in both primiparous and pluriparous women.
                Prospective, randomized study.
                362 women with singleton pregnancies, cephalic presentations, gestational age of 36 completed weeks or more were allocated at random to induction with oxytocin either 6 hours after PROM (n = 62) (early) or 24 hours (n = 62) (late). Those eligible, but not participating in the study, totalled 238 women. MAIN OBSTETRIC MEASURES: Time of spontaneous labor in the late induction group, length of labor, obstetric intervention rate, maternal morbidity, and the degree of histologic chorioamnionitis.
                The length of labor was longer in the late induction group than in the early induction group in both primiparous and pluriparous (p < 0.05). There were no overall differences in the rate of obstetric interventions or maternal morbidity, but there were marked differences between primiparous and pluriparous women. Increasing time span between the period from rupture of membranes to delivery increased the degree of histologic chorioamnionitis.
                If a woman wants a short labor, she will benefit from early induction. We did not find statistical differences in the rate of obstetric intervention or in the maternal morbidity, but there was a tendency towards adverse effects of late induction. To compare expectant management with early induction of labour in pregnant patients with prelabour rupture of membranes at term and unfavourable cervix.
                A prospective, randomised study of 154 women with prelabour rupture of membranes at term of whom 80 had been managed expectantly, and 74 had undergone oxytocin induction at a rate of 2.5 mU/min. Digital examination was not performed before oxytocin infusion, and the first was delayed until 4 h (nulliparae), or 2 h (multiparae) of regular uterine contractions.
                The mean period from rupture of membranes to delivery was significantly shorter in the induction group. The mean duration of labour was significantly shorter in the expectant group. Operative vaginal deliveries were more common in the induction group, and fetal distress was the most common cause of operative vaginal deliveries. The caesarean rates were low and similar in both groups. Maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity was similar and no difference was found in the length of hospitalisation.
                Expectant management in patients with ruptured membranes at term is safe and reduces the frequency of operative vaginal deliveries. To test whether a policy of active management of nulliparous labour would reduce the rate of caesarean section and prolonged labour without influencing maternal satisfaction.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Tertiary referral obstetric unit, Auckland, New Zealand.
                Nulliparous women in spontaneous labour at term with singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation and without fetal distress.
                After the onset of active labour, previously consented women were randomly assigned to active management (n = 320) or to routine care (n = 331). Active labour was defined as regular painful contractions, occurring at least once in five minutes, lasting at least 40 seconds, accompanied by either spontaneous rupture of the membranes, or full cervical effacement and dilatation of at least two centimetres. Active management included early amniotomy, two-hourly vaginal assessments, and early use of high dose oxytocin for slow progress in labour. Routine care was not prespecified. Prolonged labour was > 12 hours duration. Maternal satisfaction with labour care was assessed by postal questionnaire at six weeks postpartum.
                Mode of delivery, duration of labour, and maternal satisfaction.
                Active management of labour did not reduce the rate of caesarean section 30/320 (9.4%), compared with 32/331 (9.7%) for routine care, but did shorten the length of first stage of labour (median 240 min vs 290 min; P = 0.02), and reduce the relative risk of prolonged labour (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.22, 0.71). There were no differences between groups in the rates of newborn nursery admission, neonatal acidosis, low Apgar scores, or postpartum haemorrhage. Satisfaction with labour care was high (77%) and did not differ between groups.
                Active management of labour reduced the duration of the first stage of labour without affecting the rate of caesarean section, maternal satisfaction, or other maternal or newborn morbidity.
A policy of labour induction compared with expectant management is associated with fewer perinatal deaths and fewer caesarean sections. Some infant morbidities such as meconium aspiration syndrome were also reduced with a policy of post-term labour induction although no significant differences in the rate of NICU admission were seen.
However, the absolute risk of perinatal death is small. Women should be appropriately counselled in order to make an informed choice between scheduled induction for a post-term pregnancy or monitoring without induction (or delayed induction).