Background: Induction of labor (IOL) in nulliparas with premature rupture of membranes (PROM) and an unfavorable cervix at term poses challenges. Our study sought to investigate the impact of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) compared to oxytocin on the duration of IOL in this specific group of parturients. Methods: This was retrospective matched-case study. All nulliparas with term PROM who underwent induction between January 2006 to April 2023 at Shaare Zedek Medical Center were identified. Cases induced by either PGE2 or oxytocin were matched by the following criteria: (1) time from PROM to IOL; (2) modified Bishop score prior to IOL ≤ 5; (3) newborn birthweight; and (4) vertex position. The primary outcome was time from IOL to delivery. Results: Ninety-five matched cases were identified. All had a modified Bishop score ≤ 5. Maternal age (26 ± 4.7 years old, p = 0.203) and gestational age at delivery (38.6 ± 0.6, p = 0.701) were similar between the groups. Matched factors including time from PROM to IOL (23.5 ± 19.2 versus 24.3 ± 21.4 p = 0.780), birth weight of the newborn (3111 g versus 3101 g, p = 0.842), and occiput anterior position (present on 98% in both groups p = 0.687) were similar. Time from IOL to delivery was significantly shorter by 3 h and 36 min in the group induced with oxytocin than in the group induced with PGE2 (p = 0.025). Within 24 h, 55 (58%) of those induced with PGE2 delivered, compared to 72 (76%) of those induced with oxytocin, (p = 0.033). The cesarean delivery rates [18 (19%) versus 17 (18%)], blood transfusion rates [2 (2%) versus 3 (3%)], and Apgar scores (8.8 versus 8.9) were similar between the groups (PGE2 versus oxytocin, respectively), p ≥ 0.387. Conclusions: Induction with oxytocin, among nulliparas with term PROM and an unfavorable cervix, was associated with a shorter time from IOL to delivery and a higher rate of vaginal delivery within 24 h, with no difference in short-term maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes.

Women with preexisting diabetes and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) are at higher risk for adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, there is no consensus on a uniform approach regarding mode of birth (MOB) for all forms of diabetes. The aim of the study is to compare MOB in women with preexisting diabetes and GDM and possible factors influencing it. A retrospective cohort study of women with GDM and preexisting diabetes between 2015 and 2021 at a tertiary referral center was conducted. One thousand three hundred eighty-five singleton pregnancies were included. One thousand twenty-two (74.4%) women had a vaginal birth (VB) and 351 (25.6%) a caesarean section. Preexisting diabetes was significantly associated with caesarean section compared to GDM (OR 2.43). Five hundred fifty-one (40.1%) women underwent induction of labor, and 122 (22.1%) women had a secondary caesarean after IOL. Women induced due to spontaneous rupture of membrane (SROM) achieved the highest rate of VB at 93%. The lowest rates of VB occurred if indication for induction was for preeclampsia or hypertension. IOL was significantly less successful in preexisting diabetes with a VB achieved in 56.4% for type 1 diabetes and 52.6% of type 2 diabetes compared to GDM (78.2% in GDM; 81.2% in IGDM; OR 3.25, 95% CI 1.70-6.19, p < 0.001). The rate of VB was higher who were induced preterm compared to women with term IOL (n = 240 (81.9%) vs. n = 199 (73.2%); p < 0.05). Parity, previous VB and SROM favored VB after IOL, whereas preexisting diabetes, hypertension, and IOL after 40 + 0 weeks are independent risk factors for caesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies had found that the mechanical methods were as effective as pharmacological methods in achieving vaginal delivery. However, whether balloon catheter induction is suitable for women with severe cervical immaturity and whether it will increase the related risks still need to be further explored.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of Foley catheter balloon for labor induction at term in primiparas with different cervical scores.
METHODS: A total of 688 primiparas who received cervical ripening with a Foley catheter balloon were recruited in this study. They were divided into 2 groups: Group 1 (Bishop score ≤ 3) and Group 2 (3 < Bishop score < 7). Detailed medical data before and after using of balloon were faithfully recorded.
RESULTS: The cervical Bishop scores of the two groups after catheter placement were all significantly higher than those before (Group 1: 5.49 ± 1.31 VS 2.83 ± 0.39, P<0.05; Group 2: 6.09 ± 1.00 VS 4.45 ± 0.59, P<0.05). The success rate of labor induction in group 2 was higher than that in group 1 (P<0.05). The incidence of intrauterine infection in Group 1 was higher than that in Group 2 (18.3% VS 11.3%, P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The success rates of induction of labor by Foley catheter balloon were different in primiparas with different cervical conditions, the failure rate of induction of labor and the incidence of intrauterine infection were higher in primiparas with severe cervical immaturity.

BACKGROUND: Labor induction rates have increased over the last decades, and in many high-income countries, more than one in four labors are induced. Outpatient management of labor induction has been suggested in low-risk pregnancies to improve women\'s birth experiences while also promoting a more efficient use of healthcare resources. The primary aim of this paper was to assess the proportion of women in a historical cohort that would have been eligible for outpatient labor induction with oral misoprostol. Second, we wanted to report safety outcomes and assess efficacy outcomes for mothers and infants in pregnancies that met the criteria for outpatient care.
METHODS: Criteria for outpatient labor induction with oral misoprostol were applied to a historical cohort of women with induction of labor at two Norwegian tertiary hospitals in the period January 1, through July 31, 2021. The criteria included low-risk women with an unscarred uterus expecting a healthy, singleton baby in cephalic position at term. The primary outcome was the proportion of women eligible for outpatient labor induction. Secondary outcomes included reasons for ineligibility and, for eligible women, safety and efficacy outcomes.
RESULTS: Overall, 29.7% of the 1320 women who underwent labor induction in a singleton term pregnancy met the criteria for outpatient labor induction. We identified two serious adverse events that potentially could have occurred outside the hospital if the women had received outpatient care. The mean duration from initiation of labor induction to administration of the last misoprostol was 22.4 h. One in 14 multiparous women gave birth within 3 h after the last misoprostol dose.
CONCLUSIONS: In this historical cohort, three in ten women met the criteria for outpatient management of labor induction with oral misoprostol. Serious adverse events were rare. The average time span from the initiation of labor induction to the last misoprostol was nearly 24 h. This suggests a potential for low-risk women with an induced labor to spend a substantial period of time at home before labor onset. However, larger studies testing or evaluating labor induction with oral misoprostol as an outpatient procedure are needed to draw conclusions.

BACKGROUND: Labor is both a physiological and physical activity that requires energy expenditure by the woman. Despite this, women are often fasted in labor, with hydration requirements addressed predominantly by intravenous therapy. Little is known about how best to manage this in nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor, who can be prone to lengthy labors. Therefore, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effects of intravenous hydration regimens on nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Databases searched were PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science using the search strategy combination of associated key concepts for intravenous therapy and nulliparous laboring women. The primary outcome was excessive neonatal weight loss. Meta-analyses for categorical outcomes included estimates of odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated; and for continuous outcomes the standardized mean difference, each with its 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed visually and by using the χ2 statistic and I2 with significance being set at p < 0.10.
RESULTS: A total of 1512 studies were located and following screening, three studies met the eligibility criteria. No studies reported excessive neonatal weight loss. Increased rates of intravenous therapy (250 mL/h vs. 125 mL/h) during labor were not found to reduce the overall length of labor (mean difference -0.07 h, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.13 h) or reduce cesarean sections (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45-1.23), when women were not routinely fasted.
CONCLUSIONS: Our review found no significant improvements for nulliparous women who received higher intravenous fluid volumes when undergoing induction of labor and were not routinely fasted. However, data are limited, and further research is needed.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical ripening is commonly performed before oxytocin administration during labor induction in pregnant women with an unfavorable cervix. In Japan, a controlled-release Dinoprostone vaginal insert (CR-DVI) was approved in 2020. Although many studies have compared the mechanical methods of ripening and prostaglandins, few have examined the impact of additional options for labor induction. This study aimed to assess the impact of CR-DVI as an additional option for labor induction in women with an unfavorable cervix.
METHODS: In this single-center retrospective study conducted in Japan, 265 participants were divided into two groups: before (January 2018 to May 2020) and after (June 2020 to November 2022) CR-DVI introduction. Before CR-DVI was introduced, hygroscopic dilators were used for all cases instead. On the other hand, after the introduction of CR-DVI, the first choice for cervical ripening was CR-DVI. The CR-DVI was retained vaginally for up to 12 hours after insertion. However, if hyper-stimulation or non-reassuring fetal status was suspected, or if a new membrane rupture occurred, it was removed immediately according to the removal criteria. Oxytocin infusions were used during both periods if needed. We compared delivery and neonatal outcomes between the groups.
RESULTS: The 265 participants were divided into two groups: before (n=116) and after (n=149) CR-DVI introduction. There were no significant differences in maternal characteristics except for the primiparous proportion. CR-DVI was used in 93% of cases after introduction. Hygroscopic dilators also continued to be used; however, their use decreased to about 34%. The vaginal delivery rate was significantly higher after the introduction of CR-DVI than before its introduction (50.9% vs. 66.4%; p=0.01). Multivariable analysis revealed a significantly higher rate of vaginal delivery after CR-DVI introduction. Of the 149 cases in which a CR-DVI was used, 111 (79.9%) were removed before 12 hours. There were no significant differences in neonatal outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: The rate of vaginal delivery was higher after CR-DVI introduction than before its introduction, and adverse pregnancy outcomes did not increase. Therefore, introducing CR-DVI as an option for labor induction may increase the probability of vaginal delivery. Safety can also be ensured by adhering to the removal criteria.

BACKGROUND: There has been increased use of both induction of labor (IOL) and cesarean section for women with term pregnancies in many high-income countries, and a trend toward birth at earlier gestational ages. Existing evidence regarding the association between IOL and cesarean section for term pregnancies is mixed and conflicting, and little evidence is available on the differential effect at each week of gestation, stratified by parity.
METHODS: To explore the association between IOL and primary cesarean section for singleton cephalic pregnancies at term, compared with two definitions of expectant management (first: at or beyond the week of gestation at birth following IOL; and secondary: only beyond the week of gestation at birth following IOL), we performed analyses of population-based historical cohort data on women who gave birth in one Australian state (Queensland), between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2018. Women who gave birth before 37+0 or after 41+6 weeks of gestation, had stillbirths, no-labor, multiple births (twins or triplets), non-cephalic presentation at birth, a previous cesarean section, or missing data on included variables were excluded. Four sub-datasets were created for each week at birth (37-40). Unadjusted relative risk, adjusted relative risk using modified Poisson regression, and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated in each sub-dataset. Analyses were stratified by parity (nulliparas vs. parous women with a previous vaginal birth). Sensitivity analyses were conducted by limiting to women with low-risk pregnancies.
RESULTS: A total of 239 094 women were included in the analysis, 36.7% of whom gave birth following IOL. The likelihood of primary cesarean section following IOL in a Queensland population-based cohort was significantly higher at 38 and 39 weeks, compared with expectant management up to 41+6 weeks, for both nulliparas and paras with singleton cephalic pregnancies, regardless of risk status of pregnancy and definition of expectant management. No significant difference was found for nulliparas at 37 and 40 weeks; and for paras at 40 weeks.
CONCLUSIONS: Future studies are suggested to investigate further the association between IOL and other maternal and neonatal outcomes at each week of gestation in different maternal populations, before making any recommendation.

BACKGROUND: Birth at early term (37+0-38+6 completed gestational weeks [GW] and additional days) is associated with adverse neonatal outcomes compared with waiting to ≥39 GW. Most studies report outcomes after elective cesarean section or a mix of all modes of births; it is unclear whether these adverse outcomes apply to early-term babies born after induction of labor (IOL). We aimed to determine, in women with a non-urgent induction indication (elective/planned >48 h in advance), if IOL at early and late term was associated with adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes compared with IOL at full term.
METHODS: An observational cohort study as a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial of 1087 New Zealand women with a planned IOL ≥37+0 GW. Multivariable logistic regression was used to analyze neonatal and maternal outcomes in relation to gestational age; 37+0-38+6 (early term), 39+0-40+6 (full term) and ≥41+0 (late term) GW. Neonatal outcome analyses were adjusted for sex, birthweight, mode of birth and induction indication, and maternal outcome analyses for parity, age, body mass index and induction method. The primary neonatal outcome was admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for >4 hours; the primary maternal outcome was cesarean section.
RESULTS: Among the 1087 participants, 266 had IOL at early term, 480 at full term, and 341 at late term. Babies born following IOL at early term had increased odds for NICU admission for >4 hours (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.16, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.16-4.05), compared with full term. Women having IOL at early term had no difference in emergency cesarean rates but had an increased need for a second induction method (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.15-2.51) and spent 4 h longer from start of IOL to birth (Hodges-Lehmann estimator 4.10, 95% CI 1.33-6.95) compared with those with IOL at full term.
CONCLUSIONS: IOL for a non-urgent indication at early term was associated with adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes and no benefits compared with IOL at full term. These findings support international guidelines to avoid IOL before 39 GW unless there is an evidence-based indication for earlier planned birth and will help inform women and clinicians in their decision-making about timing of IOL.

The purpose of this prospective cohort study is to identify the predictive factors for vaginal delivery among women (n = 146) who underwent cervical ripening using a dinoprostone insert (PG) alone (13.7%), cervical ripening balloon (CRB) alone (52.7%), oral misoprostol (M) alone (4.1%), or repeated methods (R, 29.5%) for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) at term, and to analyze maternal and neonatal morbidity outcomes according to the method for cervical ripening. After cervical ripening, vaginal delivery occurred in 84.2% (n = 123) and was similar among groups (90.0% after PG, 83.1% after CRB, 83.3% after M, and 83.7% after R; p = 0.89). After a multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusted for potential confounders, the internal cervical os being open before cervical ripening was a predictor of vaginal delivery (adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 4.38, 95% confidence index (CI) of 1.62-13.3, p = 0.03), and previous cesarean delivery was a predictor of cesarean delivery (aOR of 7.67, 95% CI of 2.49-24.00, p < 0.01). Birthweight was also significantly associated with cesarean delivery (aOR of 1.15, 95% CI of 1.03-1.31, p = 0.02). The rates of maternal and neonatal morbidity outcomes were 10.9% (n = 16) and 19.9% (n = 29), respectively, and did not differ according to the mode of delivery and to the method used for cervical ripening. Identifying these specific high-risk women (previous cesarean delivery and internal cervical os being closed before cervical ripening) for cesarean delivery among women who underwent cervical ripening for GDM at term is important and practical for all physicians to make a decision in partnership with women.

BACKGROUND: Induction of labor is common; however, the optimum clinical strategy for induction of labor is less clear. Variations in clinical practices related to induction of labor may lead to increased complications and longer induction of labor times.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze whether the implementation of an evidence-based standardized care pathway improves the clinical outcomes associated with induction of labor.
METHODS: This was an approved quality improvement project implementing a clinical care pathway for induction of labor. Moreover, this was a retrospective cohort study of inductions of labor for 5 months before (January 2018 to May 2018) and 14 months after (August 2018 to September 2019) the implementation of the care pathway. The primary outcome was time from admission to delivery. Time from admission to delivery was stratified by mode of delivery. The secondary outcomes included chorioamnionitis, endometritis, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, cesarean delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and a composite of unanticipated outcomes (chorioamnionitis, endometritis, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, cesarean delivery, and postpartum hemorrhage). In addition, pathway adherence was analyzed. The outcomes were analyzed using 2-tailed t tests for continuous data and the Fisher exact test and chi-square tests for categorical data. Propensity score matching was used to assess for confounding by potential covariates.
RESULTS: A total of 1471 inductions of labor were reviewed, with 392 inductions of labor before the implementation of the care pathway and 1079 inductions of labor after the implementation of the care pathway. The pathway was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the time from admission to delivery by 1.2 hours (from 23.4 to 22.2 hours; P=.08). There was a nonsignificant increase in the time to cesarean delivery before (28.2 hours) and after (28.8 hours) protocol implementation (P=.71). There was a significant decrease in the time to delivery by 1.7 hours for vaginal deliveries (from 22.2 to 20.5 hours) after protocol implementation (P=.02). There was a significant decrease in chorioamnionitis (from 12.5% to 6.0%; odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.67), a significant decrease in endometritis (from 6.9% to 2.6%; odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.65), and a significant decrease in composite unanticipated outcomes (from 56.9% to 36.6%; odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.56) after the implementation of the care pathway. There was no significant difference in postpartum hemorrhage (from 7.9% to 6.1%; odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-1.22), neonatal intensive care unit admissions (from 18.1% to 14.0%; odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.02), or cesarean deliveries (from 19.6% to 20.1%; odds ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-1.40) after the implementation of the care pathway. Pathway adherence varied, ranging from 50% to 89%.
CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a standardized induction of labor pathway was associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the time from admission to delivery by 1.2 hours and improved pregnancy outcomes, including decreased infections and unanticipated outcomes. Further opportunities for improvements in clinical outcomes may be realized with increased compliance with the care pathway.