Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix

Kahyaoglu, Serkan; BÜYÜK, Gül Nihal; Oskovi Kaplan, Zeynep Aslı; sert, Umit yasemin

doi:10.21613/GORM.2020.1039

Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix

Gul Nihal BUYUK, (Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi, Dr. Zekai Tahir Burak Kadın Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Eğitim Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Ümit Yasemin SERT, (Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi, Dr. Zekai Tahir Burak Kadın Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Eğitim Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Zeynep Aslı OSKOVİ KAPLAN, (Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi, Dr. Zekai Tahir Burak Kadın Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Eğitim Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Serkan KAHYAOĞLU (Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi, Dr. Zekai Tahir Burak Kadın Sağlığı ve Hastalıkları Eğitim Araştırma Hastanesi, Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine

3 2

Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 27 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 123 - 127 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039 İndeks Tarihi: 04-02-2022

Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix

Öz:

OBJECTIVE: Dinoprostone is a drug of choice in our daily practice for the induction of labor. The aim of our study; to compare the use of oxytocin with dinoprostone (PGE2- Propess©) used in term multiparous pregnant women to ripen the cervix. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 507 patients were included in the study. Group A, consisted of 262 women with term multiparous pregnancy Bishop score ≤6 underwent induction of labor with a vaginal insert containing 10-mg timed-release dinoprostone (Propess© -prostaglandin E2). Group B, consisted of 245 cases of pregnancy with Bishop score ≤6 underwent induction of labor with iv oxytocin and was matched for the patient's age and parity. The following data were recorded: age, gestational age, body mass index, the time from the drug administration to the vaginal labor, delivery mode, indications of induction, cesarean indication, birth weight, Apgar score, and need of neonatal intensive care unit. RESULTS: The primary outcome of the in group B interval from induction to vaginal delivery was similar between the two groups. In group A, 41 patients and in group B, 23 patients had a cesarean section. Cesarean section rate was lower in the oxytocin group (cesarean rate 15.6% versus 9.3%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: It appears; Dinoprostone ovule increases the cesarean rate in terms, multiparous cases with inappropriate cervical score and does not shorten the duration of delivery. Therefore, the use of oxytocin for cervical ripening in multiparous women may be a more appropriate option.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Hochberg A, Pardo A, Oron G, Krispin E, Amikam U, Wiznitzer A, Hadar E, Salman L. Perinatal outcome following induction of labor in patients with good glycemic controlled gestational diabetes: does timing matter? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;300(2):299-303. doi: 10.1007/s00 404-019-05183-z.
2. Coonrod DV, Bay RC, Kishi GY. The epidemiology of labor induction: Arizona, 1997. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(6):1355-62. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.106248.
3. Celik HG, Celik E, Yildirim GY. Does fetal fibronectin predict the delivery route in nulliparous women at postterm induced by dinoprostone? Gynecol Obstet Reprod Med. 2020;26(2):83-7. doi: 10.21613/GORM.2018.880
4. Rayburn WF, Zhang J. Rising rates of labor induction: present concerns and future strategies. Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 100(1):164-7. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(02)02047-1.
5. Ventura SJ, Martin JA, Curtin SC, Mathews T. Births: final data for 1997. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 1999;47(18):1-96. PMID: 10334087.
6. Buser D, Mora G, Arias F. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89(4):581-5. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00015-X.
7. Canda T, Demir N, Sezer O. Comparison of Two Methods in Labor Induction in Nulliparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix at Term: Oxytocin Alone Versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Slow-Release System (Propess®) + Oxytocin. Gynecol Obstet Reprod Med. 2010;16(3):141-3.
8. Liao JB, Buhimschi CS, Norwitz ER. Normal labor: mechanism and duration. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2005;32(2):145-64, vii. doi: 10.1016/j.ogc.2005.01.001.
9. Lin A, Kupferminc M, Dooley SL. A randomized trial of extra-amniotic saline infusion versus laminaria for cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;86(4 Pt 1):545-9. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00234-i.
10. Rouben D, Arias F. A randomized trial of extra-amniotic saline infusion plus intracervical Foley catheter balloon versus prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel for ripening the cervix and inducing labor in patients with unfavorable cervices. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;82(2):290-4. PMID: 8336880.
11. Sherman DJ, Frenkel E, Pansky M, Caspi E, Bukovsky I, Langer R. Balloon cervical ripening with extra-amniotic infusion of saline or prostaglandin E2: a double-blind, randomized controlled study. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97 (3):375-80. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)01168-6.
12. Buccellato CA, Stika CS, Frederiksen MC. A randomized trial of misoprostol versus extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion with oxytocin for induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(5):1039-44. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000. 106052.
13. Foong LC, Vanaja K, Tan G, Chua S. Membrane sweeping in conjunction with labor induction. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(4):539-42. doi:10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00995-9.
14. Bricker L, Luckas M. Amniotomy alone for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(4): CD0028 62. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00995-9.
15. Witter FR. Prostaglandin E2 preparations for preinduction cervical ripening. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2000;43(3):469- 74. doi: 10.1097/00003081-200009000-00007.
16. Goldman JB, Wigton TR. A randomized comparison of extra-amniotic saline infusion and intracervical dinoprostone gel for cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93 (2):271-4. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(98)00359-7.
17. Schreyer P, Sherman DJ, Ariely S, Herman A, Caspi E. Ripening the highly unfavorable cervix with extra-amniotic saline instillation or vaginal prostaglandin E2 application. Obstet Gynecol. 1989;73(6):938-42. doi: 10.1097/ 00006250-198906000-00006.
18. Kelly AJ, Malik S, Smith L, Kavanagh J, Thomas J. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4): CD003101. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003101.pub2.
19. Edwards RK, Richards DS. Preinduction Cervical Assesment. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2000;43(3): 440-6. doi: 10.1097/00003081-200009000-00004.
20. Aghideh FK, Mullin PM, Ingles S, Ouzounian JG, Opper N, Wilson ML, et al. A comparison of obstetrical outcomes with labor induction agents used at term. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(6):592-6. doi: 10.3109/147 67058.2013.831066.
21. Hollingsworth M, Gallimore S. Evidence that cervical softening in the pregnant rat is independent of increasing uterine contractility. J Reprod Fertil. 1981;63(2):449-54. doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0630449.
22. Swamy GK. Current methods of labor induction. Semin Perinatol. 2012;36(5):348-52. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi. 2012.04.018.
23. Wei Y, Li X, Zhang Y, Guo Y, Yin B, Chen D, et al. Comparison of Dinoprostone and Oxytocin for the Induction of Labor in Late-Term Pregnancy and the Rate of Cesarean Section: A Retrospective Study in Ten Centers in South China. Med Sci Monit. 2019;25:8554- 61. doi: 10.12659/MSM.918330.
24. Christensen FC, Tehranifar M, Gonzalez JL, Qualls CR, Rappaport VJ, Rayburn WF. Randomized trial of concurrent oxytocin with a sustained-release dinoprostone vaginal insert for labor induction at term. Am j Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(1):61-5. doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.11 8309.
25. Hadi H. Cervical ripening and labor induction: clinical guidelines. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2000;43(3):524-36. doi: 10.1097/00003081-200009000-00012.
26. Gherman RB, Browning J, O'Boyle A, Goodwin TM. Oral misoprostol vs. intravaginal prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening. A randomized trial. J Reprod Med. 2001;46(7):641-6. PMID: 11499184.
27. Alfirevic Z, Kelly AJ, Dowswell T. Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009(4):CD003246. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003246.pub2.
28. Kelly AJ, Malik S, Smith L, Kavanagh J, Thomas J. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4): CD003101.
29. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice bulletin no. 146: Management of late-term and postterm pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;124(2 Pt 1):390-6. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003101.pub2.
30. Mahendru R, Yadav S. Shortening the induction delivery interval with prostaglandins: a randomized controlled trial of solo or in combination. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2011;12(2):80-5. doi: 10.5152/jtgga.2011.20. eCollection 2011.
31. Sinkey RG, Lacevic J, Reljic T, Hozo I, Gibson KS, Odibo AO, et al. Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks among nulliparous women: The impact on maternal and neonatal risk. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):e0193169. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193169. eCollection 2018.

APA	BÜYÜK G, sert U, Oskovi Kaplan Z, Kahyaoglu S (2021). Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. , 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
Chicago	BÜYÜK Gül Nihal,sert Umit yasemin,Oskovi Kaplan Zeynep Aslı,Kahyaoglu Serkan Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. (2021): 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
MLA	BÜYÜK Gül Nihal,sert Umit yasemin,Oskovi Kaplan Zeynep Aslı,Kahyaoglu Serkan Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. , 2021, ss.123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
AMA	BÜYÜK G,sert U,Oskovi Kaplan Z,Kahyaoglu S Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. . 2021; 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
Vancouver	BÜYÜK G,sert U,Oskovi Kaplan Z,Kahyaoglu S Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. . 2021; 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
IEEE	BÜYÜK G,sert U,Oskovi Kaplan Z,Kahyaoglu S "Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix." , ss.123 - 127, 2021. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
ISNAD	BÜYÜK, Gül Nihal vd. "Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix". (2021), 123-127. https://doi.org/10.21613/GORM.2020.1039

APA	BÜYÜK G, sert U, Oskovi Kaplan Z, Kahyaoglu S (2021). Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine, 27(2), 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
Chicago	BÜYÜK Gül Nihal,sert Umit yasemin,Oskovi Kaplan Zeynep Aslı,Kahyaoglu Serkan Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine 27, no.2 (2021): 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
MLA	BÜYÜK Gül Nihal,sert Umit yasemin,Oskovi Kaplan Zeynep Aslı,Kahyaoglu Serkan Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine, vol.27, no.2, 2021, ss.123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
AMA	BÜYÜK G,sert U,Oskovi Kaplan Z,Kahyaoglu S Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine. 2021; 27(2): 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
Vancouver	BÜYÜK G,sert U,Oskovi Kaplan Z,Kahyaoglu S Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine. 2021; 27(2): 123 - 127. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
IEEE	BÜYÜK G,sert U,Oskovi Kaplan Z,Kahyaoglu S "Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix." GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine, 27, ss.123 - 127, 2021. 10.21613/GORM.2020.1039
ISNAD	BÜYÜK, Gül Nihal vd. "Oxytocin Versus Dinoprostone For Labor Induction in Multiparous Women with Unfavorable Cervix". GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine 27/2 (2021), 123-127. https://doi.org/10.21613/GORM.2020.1039