Aghideh Farnaz K, Mullin Patrick M, Ingles Sue, Ouzounian Joseph G, Opper Neisha, Wilson Melissa L, Miller David A, Lee Richard H
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Los Angeles County, University of Southern California (LAC+USC) Medical Center, Los Angeles , CA , USA and.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Apr;27(6):592-6. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.831066. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
To compare the obstetrical outcomes of term pregnancies induced with one of four commonly used labor induction agents.
This is a retrospective cohort study of induced deliveries between 1 August 1995 and 31 December 2007 occurring at the Los Angeles County + University of Southern California Medical Center. Viable, singleton, term pregnancies undergoing induction were identified. Exclusion criteria included gestational age less than 37 weeks, previous cesarean delivery, breech presentation, stillbirth, premature rupture of membranes, and fetal anomaly. Induction methods studied were oxytocin, misoprostol, dinoprostone and Foley catheter. Our primary outcome was cesarean delivery rate among the four induction agents. Secondary outcomes included rate of failed induction, obstetrical complications, and immediate neonatal complications.
A total of 3707 women were included in the study (1486 nulliparous; 2221 multiparous). Outcomes were compared across induction methods using Chi-square Tests (Pearson or Fisher's, as appropriate). Among the nulliparous patients, there was no statistical difference among the four induction agents with regards to cesarean delivery rate (p = 0.51), frequency of failed inductions (p = 0.49), the cesarean delivery frequency for "fetal distress" (p = 0.82) and five minute Apgar score <7 (p = 0.24). Among parous patients, the cesarean delivery rate varied significantly by induction method (p < 0.001), being lowest among those receiving misoprostol (10%). Those receiving oxytocin and transcervical Foley catheter had cesarean rates of 22%, followed by dinoprostone at 18%. The rate of failed inductions was 2% among those receiving misoprostol, compared to 7-8% among those in the other groups (p < 0.01). Although cases of "fetal distress" between the four induction agents was not significantly different amongst multipara women, the cesarean delivery indication for "fetal distress" was higher among multipara receiving misoprostol (p = 0.004). There was no difference among the different induction agents with regards to five minute Apgar <7 (p = 0.34).
Among nulliparous women, all induction methods have similar rate of cesarean delivery. The use of misoprostol appears to be associated with a lower risk of cesarean birth among parous women induced at our institution.
比较四种常用引产药物引产的足月妊娠的产科结局。
这是一项对1995年8月1日至2007年12月31日在洛杉矶县+南加州大学医学中心发生的引产分娩进行的回顾性队列研究。确定了接受引产的存活、单胎、足月妊娠。排除标准包括孕周小于37周、既往剖宫产史、臀位、死产、胎膜早破和胎儿畸形。研究的引产方法为缩宫素、米索前列醇、地诺前列酮和Foley导管。我们的主要结局是四种引产药物的剖宫产率。次要结局包括引产失败率、产科并发症和新生儿即刻并发症。
共有3707名女性纳入研究(1486名单胎初产妇;2221名单胎经产妇)。使用卡方检验(酌情使用Pearson或Fisher检验)比较不同引产方法的结局。在初产妇中,四种引产药物在剖宫产率(p = 0.51)、引产失败频率(p = 0.49)、“胎儿窘迫”的剖宫产频率(p = 0.82)和5分钟Apgar评分<7(p = 0.24)方面无统计学差异。在经产妇中,剖宫产率因引产方法而异(p < 0.001),在接受米索前列醇的产妇中最低(10%)。接受缩宫素和经宫颈Foley导管的产妇剖宫产率为22%,其次是地诺前列酮为18%。接受米索前列醇的产妇引产失败率为2%,而其他组为7 - 8%(p < 0.01)。虽然四种引产药物之间“胎儿窘迫”的病例在经产妇中无显著差异,但接受米索前列醇的经产妇中“胎儿窘迫”的剖宫产指征更高(p = 0.004)。不同引产药物在5分钟Apgar评分<7方面无差异(p = 0.34)。
在初产妇中,所有引产方法的剖宫产率相似。在我们机构接受引产的经产妇中,使用米索前列醇似乎与较低的剖宫产风险相关。