Abbonarsi

Severe preeclampsia remote from term: Labor induction or elective cesarean delivery? - 09/09/11

Doi : 10.1016/S0002-9378(98)70133-4 
Anwar H. Nassar, MDa, Abdallah M. Adra, MDa, Nahida Chakhtoura, MDa, Orlando Gómez-Marín, MSc, PhDb, Samir Beydoun, MDa
Miami, Florida 

Abstract

Objectives: The study’s objectives were as follows: (1) to determine the rate of vaginal delivery after labor induction in severe preeclampsia remote from term and (2) to determine potential predictors of success. Study Design: Retrospective chart review was conducted on live-born singleton pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampsia and delivered at 24 to 34 weeks’ gestation from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 1996. Exclusion criteria included eclampsia, presence of labor or spontaneous rupture of membranes on admission, and complication of pregnancy by an ultrasonographically detected fetal congenital anomaly. Patients were divided into 3 groups: elective cesarean delivery without labor, cesarean delivery after labor induction, and vaginal delivery after labor induction. Statistical analyses included multiple logistic regression, the Student t test, the χ2 test, and the Mann-Whitney test. P ≤ .05 was considered significant. Results: A total of 306 charts were reviewed. Among these, 161 patients (52.6%) underwent elective cesarean delivery without labor; the 2 most common indications were unfavorable cervix (33.5%) and malpresentation (22.4%). The remaining 145 patients (47.4%) underwent labor induction with a 48.3% rate of vaginal delivery after induction, ranging from 31.6% at ≤28 weeks’ gestation to 62.5% at >32 weeks’ gestation. The most common indication for cesarean delivery after induction, in 50.7% of the cases, was nonreassuring fetal heart rate. The median Bishop score was significantly higher (3 vs 2, P = .004) and the total hospital stay was significantly shorter in the vaginal delivery after induction group than in the cesarean delivery after induction group. However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in use of cervical ripening agents, gestational age at delivery, birth weight, 5-minute Apgar score, or postpartum endometritis. After exclusion of cesarean deliveries performed for malpresentation, there was no statistically significant difference in classic incision rates between the elective cesarean delivery without labor and cesarean delivery after induction groups (13.6% vs 6.8%; P = .137). According to logistic regression analysis, only the Bishop score was significantly associated with a successful induction (odds ratio 1.38, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.71). Gestational age reached marginal significance (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval 0.89-1.89). Conclusions: (1) Labor induction should be considered a reasonable option for patients with severe preeclampsia at ≤34 weeks’ gestation because 48% of patients given the chance were successfully delivered vaginally. (2) The Bishop score on admission is the best predictor of success, although the chance of successful labor induction increases with advancing gestational age. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:1210-3.)

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Keywords : Mode of delivery, preterm, severe preeclampsia


Mappa


 From the Division of Perinatology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,a and the Departments of Epidemiology and Public Health and Pediatrics,b University of Miami School of Medicine.
 Reprint requests: Anwar H. Nassar, MD, Division of Perinatology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Miami School of Medicine, PO Box 016960 (R-136), Miami, FL 33101.
 0002-9378/98 $5.00 + 0   6/6/92537


© 1998  Mosby, Inc. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 179 - N° 5

P. 1210-1213 - novembre 1998 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Pre-eclampsia and induction of labor: A randomized comparison of prostaglandin E2 as an intracervical gel, with oxytocin immediately, or as a sustained-release vaginal insert
  • Michael H. Hennessey, William F. Rayburn, Jeffrey D. Stewart, Eleanor C. Liles
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • An economic evaluation of second-trimester genetic ultrasonography for prenatal detection of Down syndrome
  • Anthony M. Vintzileos, Cande V. Ananth, Allan J. Fisher, John C. Smulian, Debra Day-Salvatore, Tryfon Beazoglou, Robert A. Knuppel

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.