-
Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. · Oct 2019
Meta Analysis Comparative StudyElective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.
- William A Grobman and Aaron B Caughey.
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. Electronic address: w-grobman@northwestern.edu.
- Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2019 Oct 1; 221 (4): 304-310.
BackgroundElective induction of labor at 39 weeks among low-risk nulliparous women has reduced the chance of cesarean and other adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in a randomized trial, although its clinical effectiveness in nonresearch settings remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of observational studies that compared elective induction of labor at 39 weeks among nulliparous women with expectant management and to use meta-analytic techniques to estimate the association of elective induction with cesarean delivery, as well as other maternal and perinatal outcomes.Study DesignStudies were eligible for this meta-analysis only if they: (1) were observational; (2) compared women undergoing labor induction at 39 weeks with women undergoing expectant management beyond that gestational age; (3) included women in the induction group only if they had no other indication for labor induction at 39 weeks; and (4) provided data specifically for nulliparous women. The predefined primary outcome was cesarean delivery, and secondary outcomes representing other maternal and perinatal morbidities also were evaluated. Outcome data from different studies were combined to estimate pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals using random-effects models.ResultsOf 375 studies identified by the initial search, 6 cohort studies, which included 66,019 women undergoing elective labor induction at 39 weeks and 584,390 undergoing expectant management, met inclusion criteria. Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks was associated with a significantly lower frequency of cesarean delivery (26.4% vs 29.1%; relative risk, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.93), as well as of peripartum infection (2.8% vs 5.2%; relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.72). Neonates of women in the induction group were less likely to have respiratory morbidity (0.7% vs 1.5%; relative risk, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.85); meconium aspiration syndrome (0.7% vs 3.0%; relative risk, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.92); and neonatal intensive care unit admission (3.5% vs 5.5%; relative risk, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.88). There also was a lower risk of perinatal mortality (0.04% vs 0.2%; relative risk, 0.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.76).ConclusionThis meta-analysis of 6 cohort studies demonstrates that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks, compared with expectant management beyond that gestational age, was associated with a significantly lower risk of cesarean delivery, maternal peripartum infection, and perinatal adverse outcomes, including respiratory morbidity, intensive care unit admission, and mortality.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.