4.6 Article

Outcomes of induction of labor after one prior cesarean

期刊

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
卷 109, 期 2, 页码 262-269

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000254169.49346.e9

关键词

-

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [HD 34210, HD 36801, HD 40485, HD 27861, HD 40560, HD 40545, HD 40544, HD 40500, HD 40512, HD 27905, HD 27915, HD 27860, HD 27917, HD 21414, HD 21410, HD 34146, HD 34116, HD 27869, HD 34208, HD 34122] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE: To compare pregnancy outcomes in women with one prior low-transverse cesarean delivery after induction of labor with pregnancy outcomes after spontaneous labor. METHODS: This study is an analysis of women with one prior low-transverse cesarean and a singleton gestation who underwent a trial of labor and who were enrolled in a 4-year prospective observational study. Pregnancy outcomes were evaluated according to whether a woman underwent spontaneous labor or labor induction. RESULTS: Among the 11,778 women studied, vaginal delivery was less likely after induction of labor both in women without and with a prior vaginal delivery (51% versus 65%, P<.001; and 83% versus 88%, P<.001). An increased risk of uterine rupture after labor induction was found only in women with no prior vaginal delivery (1.5% versus 0.8%, P=.02; and 0.6% versus 0.4%, P=.42). Blood transfusion, venous thromboembolism, and hysterectomy were also more common with induction among women without a prior vaginal delivery. No measure of perinatal morbidity was associated with labor induction. An unfavorable cervix at labor induction was not associated with any adverse outcomes except an increased risk of cesarean delivery. CONCLUSION: Induction of labor in the study population is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery in all women with an unfavorable cervix, a statistically significant, albeit clinically small, increase in maternal morbidity in women with no prior vaginal delivery, and no appreciable increase in perinatal morbidity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据