open access
Pregnancy-related comorbidities and labor induction — the effectiveness and safety of dinoprostone compared to misoprostol
, 2, 3
Affiliations- Department of Obstetrics and Perinatology, University Hospital, Cracow, Poland
- Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland
- Chair of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Cracow, Poland
open access
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the presence of the disease in pregnancy influences the effectiveness and safety of delivery preinduction with prostaglandins: misoprostol vaginal insert and dinoprostone vaginal gel.
Material and methods: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted of 560 pregnant women. The concomitant diseases mainly recorded were diabetes mellitus, hypertensive diseases, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, asthma, thrombocytopenia, and hypothyroidism. The primary study outcome was a successful vaginal delivery. The study above others evaluates the time from treatment implementation to the beginning of a labor and to a final delivery, the rate of Cesarean sections, and the presence of delivery complications.
Results: Among women with a concomitant disease, Caesarean section was observed more frequently in the misoprostol group. In the dinoprostone group, mothers with the concomitant disease as compared to healthy mothers required more time to the delivery and to achieve the beginning of labor. There were no differences in postpartum complications regardless of the prostaglandins, comorbidities or mothers’ age. Neonates of mothers ≥ 35 years old with concomitant disease had lower average Apgar scores.
Conclusions: Our study showed that comorbidities seem to increase the caesarean section risk in the misoprostol preinduction group but in the dinoprostone group they prolong the time needed to achieve an active labour phase and a delivery.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate whether the presence of the disease in pregnancy influences the effectiveness and safety of delivery preinduction with prostaglandins: misoprostol vaginal insert and dinoprostone vaginal gel.
Material and methods: This is a retrospective cohort study conducted of 560 pregnant women. The concomitant diseases mainly recorded were diabetes mellitus, hypertensive diseases, intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, asthma, thrombocytopenia, and hypothyroidism. The primary study outcome was a successful vaginal delivery. The study above others evaluates the time from treatment implementation to the beginning of a labor and to a final delivery, the rate of Cesarean sections, and the presence of delivery complications.
Results: Among women with a concomitant disease, Caesarean section was observed more frequently in the misoprostol group. In the dinoprostone group, mothers with the concomitant disease as compared to healthy mothers required more time to the delivery and to achieve the beginning of labor. There were no differences in postpartum complications regardless of the prostaglandins, comorbidities or mothers’ age. Neonates of mothers ≥ 35 years old with concomitant disease had lower average Apgar scores.
Conclusions: Our study showed that comorbidities seem to increase the caesarean section risk in the misoprostol preinduction group but in the dinoprostone group they prolong the time needed to achieve an active labour phase and a delivery.
Keywords
comorbidities; dinoprostone; labor induction; misoprostol
About this articleTitle
Pregnancy-related comorbidities and labor induction — the effectiveness and safety of dinoprostone compared to misoprostol
Journal
Issue
Article type
Research paper
Pages
647-658
Published online
2021-05-21
Page views
1144
Article views/downloads
771
DOI
Pubmed
Bibliographic record
Ginekol Pol 2021;92(9):647-658.
Keywords
comorbidities
dinoprostone
labor induction
misoprostol
Authors
Teresa Gornisiewicz
Hubert Huras
Katarzyna Kusmierska-Urban
Aleksander Galas
References (29)- Jacobsson Bo, Ladfors L, Milsom I. Advanced maternal age and adverse perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 104(4): 727–733.
- Birukov A, Herse F, Nielsen JH, et al. Blood Pressure and angiogenic markers in pregnancy: contributors to pregnancy-induced hypertension and offspring cardiovascular risk. Hypertension. 2020; 76(3): 901–909.
- Turner K, Hameed AB. Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy current practice review. Curr Hypertens Rev. 2017; 13(2): 80–88.
- Magee LA, Pels A, Helewa M, et al. Canadian hypertensive disorders of pregnancy HDP working group. The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. . Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2015; 29(5): 643–57.
- Vest AR, Cho LS. Hypertension in pregnancy. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2014; 16(3): 395.
- Koopmans CM, Bijlenga D, Groen H, et al. HYPITAT study group. Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring for gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia after 36 weeks' gestation (HYPITAT): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009; 374(9694): 979–988.
- Hutcheon JA, Lisonkova S, Magee LA, et al. Optimal timing of delivery in pregnancies with pre-existing hypertension. BJOG. 2011; 118(1): 49–54.
- Goldenberg RL, McClure EM, Harrison MS, et al. Diabetes during Pregnancy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries. Am J Perinatol. 2016; 33(13): 1227–1235.
- Poston L, Caleyachetty R, Cnattingius S, et al. Preconceptional and maternal obesity: epidemiology and health consequences. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2016; 4(12): 1025–1036.
- Yao R, Ananth CV, Park BoY, et al. Perinatal Research Consortium. Obesity and the risk of stillbirth: a population-based cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 210(5): 457.e1–457.e9.
- Kulshrestha V, Agarwal N. Maternal complications in pregnancy with diabetes. J Pak Med Assoc. 2016; 66(9 Suppl 1): S74–S77.
- Catalano PM, McIntyre HD, Cruickshank JK, et al. HAPO Study Cooperative Research Group. The hyperglycemia and adverse pregnancy outcome study: associations of GDM and obesity with pregnancy outcomes. Diabetes Care. 2012; 35(4): 780–786.
- Bomba-Opoń D, Drews K, Huras H, et al. Polish Gynecological Society Recommendations for Labor Induction. Ginekol Pol. 2017; 88(4): 224–234.
- Joseph KS, Allen AC, Dodds L, et al. The perinatal effects of delayed childbearing. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 105(6): 1410–1418.
- Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective inducion. Obstet Gynecol. 1964; 24: 266–268.
- Huras H, Radoń-Pokracka M, Górnisiewicz T, et al. Induction of labor in the light of the current literature] Ginekol. Położ. Ginekol Położ. 2016; 11(1): 21–25.
- ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114(2 Pt 1): 386–397.
- Leduc D, Biringer A, Lee L, et al. Induction of Labour. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada. 2013; 35(9): 840–857.
- Brown MA, Magee LA, Kenny LC, et al. International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy (ISSHP). The hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: ISSHP classification, diagnosis & management recommendations for international practice. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2018; 13: 291–310.
- Gibson KS, Waters TP, Bailit JL. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in electively induced low-risk term pregnancies. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 211(3): 249.e1–249.e16.
- Stock SJ, Ferguson E, Duffy A, et al. Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study. BMJ. 2012; 344: e2838.
- Souter V, Painter I, Sitcov K, et al. Maternal and newborn outcomes with elective induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 220(3): 273.e1–273.e11.
- Rossi RM, Warshak CR, Masters HR, et al. Comparison of prostaglandin and mechanical cervical ripening in the setting of small for gestational age neonates. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019; 32(22): 3841–3846.
- Ferrazzani S, De Santis L, Carducci B, et al. Prostaglandin: cervical ripening in hypertensive pregnancies. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2003; 82(6): 510–515.
- Durst JK, Subramaniam A, Tang Y, et al. Mode of delivery in nulliparous women with gestational hypertension undergoing early term induction of labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017; 30(19): 2291–2296.
- de Paiva Marques RM, Souza AS, de Lucena Feitosa FE, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes in women with and without hypertensive syndromes submitted to induction of labor with misoprostol. Hypertens Pregnancy. 2017; 36(1): 1–7.
- Hu YP, Zhou D, Li M, et al. Use of labor induction with dinoprostone vaginal suppositories in pregnant women with gestational hypertension. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2019; 45(11): 2185–2192.
- Sheibani L, Raymond K, Rugarn O, et al. Associations of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and outcomes of labor induction with prostaglandin vaginal inserts. Hypertens Pregnancy. 2018; 37(1): 51–57.
- Hawkins JS, Stephenson M, Powers B, et al. Diabetes mellitus: an independent predictor of duration of prostaglandin labor induction. J Perinatol. 2017; 37(5): 488–491.
