Perinatal and maternal outcomes according to timing of induction of labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:3
|
作者
Jeer, Bavita [1 ]
Haberfeld, Emily [1 ]
Khalil, Asma [2 ,3 ]
Thangaratinam, Shakila [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Allotey, John [4 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Birmingham, Coll Med & Dent Sci, Birmingham, England
[2] St Georges Univ London, St Georges Univ Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Fetal Med Unit, London, England
[3] St Georges Univ London, Amol & Clin Sci Res Inst, London, England
[4] Univ Birmingham, Inst Metab & Syst Res, WHO Collaborating Ctr Global Womens Hlth, ITM Heritage Bldg, Mindelsohn Way, Birmingham B15 2TH, England
[5] Birmingham Womens & Childrens NHS Fdn Trust, Birmingham, England
[6] Univ Birmingham, NIHR Birmingham Biomed Res Ctr, Birmingham, England
关键词
Induction; Labour; Meta-analysis; Caesarean section; Stillbirth; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; EXPECTANT MANAGEMENT; PROLONGED PREGNANCY; POSTTERM PREGNANCY; ELECTIVE INDUCTION; TERM PREGNANCY; NULLIPAROUS WOMEN; RISK; MEMBRANES; GESTATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.07.021
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
The risk of adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes increases with gestational age, and although induction of labour may reduce these risks, the optimal timing of induction remains unknown. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis, to determine the gestational age at which induction should be offered. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and Embase databases from inception to July 2022, to identify randomised trials comparing induction of labour at or beyond 37 & PRIME; weeks gestation with expectant management or delayed induction, and according to the gestational age at planned induction. We undertook random effects meta-analysis and pooled estimates as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed risk of bias of studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0. We included 44 trials (23,960 women and 22,191 offspring) from 1,839 citations in our meta-analysis. The odds of perinatal death (odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.81; 26 studies, 20,154 offspring), stillbirth (0.40, 0.16 to 0.98; 25 studies, 19,412 offspring), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (0.86, 0.78 to 0.96; 23 studies, 18,846 offspring), and caesarean section (0.90, 0.83 to 0.98; 40 studies, 23,616 women) were reduced in the induction of labour group compared to expectant management or delayed induction. The odds of admission to neonatal intensive care unit (0.82, 0.70 to 0.96; 6 studies, 9,316 offspring) were lower with induction of labour at 41 weeks compared to induction at or after 42 weeks' gestation, and the odds of caesarean section were reduced with labour induction at 39 weeks' compared to induction at or after 40 weeks' (0.83, 0.74 to 0.93; 8 studies, 7,677 women). There were no significant differences in pregnancy outcomes by method of induction of labour. Induction of labour compared to expectant management or delayed induction reduces the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, and the optimal timing may depend on the specific outcome of interest.
引用
收藏
页码:175 / 182
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes between induction and expectant management among women with gestational diabetes mellitus at term pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Luo, Rong
    Wen, Wendy
    Corsi, Daniel J. J.
    Fell, Deshayne B. B.
    Taljaard, Monica
    Wen, Shi Wu
    Walker, Mark C. C.
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2023, 23 (01)
  • [2] Perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by maternal cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Eggleton, Elizabeth J.
    McMurrugh, Kate J.
    Aiken, Catherine E.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2023, 228 (03) : 283 - 291
  • [3] Maternal and perinatal outcomes after elective induction of labor at 39 weeks in uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: a meta-analysis
    Sotiriadis, A.
    Petousis, S.
    Thilaganathan, B.
    Figueras, F.
    Martins, W. P.
    Odibo, A. O.
    Dinas, K.
    Hyett, J.
    ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2019, 53 (01) : 26 - +
  • [4] Does induction of labour increase the risk of caesarean section? A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials in women with intact membranes
    Wood, S.
    Cooper, S.
    Ross, S.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2014, 121 (06) : 674 - 685
  • [5] Association between the Maternal Mediterranean Diet and Perinatal Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Xu, Jirong
    Wang, Haixia
    Bian, Jingfeng
    Xu, Ming
    Jiang, Nan
    Luo, Wei
    Zu, Ping
    Yin, Wanjun
    Zhu, Peng
    ADVANCES IN NUTRITION, 2024, 15 (02)
  • [6] Impact of maternal age on perinatal outcomes in twin pregnancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Xiong, Q-F
    Yu, Z-H
    Zhang, A-L
    Zhu, X-H
    EUROPEAN REVIEW FOR MEDICAL AND PHARMACOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2022, 26 (01) : 99 - 109
  • [7] Comparison of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes between induction and expectant management among women with gestational diabetes mellitus at term pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Rong Luo
    Wendy Wen
    Daniel J. Corsi
    Deshayne B. Fell
    Monica Taljaard
    Shi Wu Wen
    Mark C. Walker
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 23
  • [8] The effectiveness of antenatal education on improving labour and birth outcomes - A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Hooper, Emily
    Mechkaroff, Olivia
    Upitis, Aurora
    Schofield, Emma
    Carland, Jane Ellen
    Henry, Amanda
    WOMEN AND BIRTH, 2025, 38 (01)
  • [9] The Bishop Score as a determinant of labour induction success: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Teixeira, Cristina
    Lunet, Nuno
    Rodrigues, Teresa
    Barros, Henrique
    ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2012, 286 (03) : 739 - 753
  • [10] Timing induction of labour at 41 or 42 weeks? A closer look at time frames of comparison: A review
    Keulen, Judit K. J.
    Bruinsma, Aafke
    Kortekaas, Joep C.
    van Dillen, Jeroen
    van der Post, Joris A. M.
    de Miranda, Esteriek
    MIDWIFERY, 2018, 66 : 111 - 118