Lisa D Levine1, Hillary R Bogner2, Adi Hirshberg3, Michal A Elovitz3, Mary D Sammel4, Sindhu K Srinivas3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: lisa.obgyndoc@gmail.com. 2. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 4. Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although the rate of inductions continues to rise, there is a paucity of data investigating subsequent pregnancy outcomes after induction. Our objective was to compare term inductions with term spontaneous labor and evaluate the rate of subsequent spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of women with 2 consecutive deliveries from 2005 through 2010 was performed. Term inductions or term spontaneous labor in the index pregnancy was included, and those with a prior sPTB were excluded. Data were obtained through chart abstraction. The primary outcome was sPTB (<37 weeks) in a subsequent pregnancy. Categorical variables were compared with χ(2) analyses, and logistic regression was used to calculate odds. RESULTS: Eight hundred eighty-seven women were included (622 inductions, 265 spontaneous labor). The overall subsequent sPTB rate was 7.2%. Term inductions were less likely to have a subsequent sPTB compared with term spontaneous labor (6% vs 11%; odds ratio [OR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.81; P = .005). This remained after adjusting for confounders (adjusted OR, 0.55; P = .04). The sPTB risk depended on gestational age of index delivery. At 37-38.9 weeks, the sPTB rate after spontaneous labor was 24% vs 9% after induction (OR, 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-6.16; P = .003). This was not significant for 39-39.9 weeks (P = .2) or 40 weeks or longer (P = .8). CONCLUSION: Induction is not a risk factor for subsequent sPTB. Spontaneous labor, however, in the early term period is associated with subsequent sPTB. Further investigation among early term deliveries is warranted to evaluate the risk of sPTB and target interventions in this cohort.
OBJECTIVE: Although the rate of inductions continues to rise, there is a paucity of data investigating subsequent pregnancy outcomes after induction. Our objective was to compare term inductions with term spontaneous labor and evaluate the rate of subsequent spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study of women with 2 consecutive deliveries from 2005 through 2010 was performed. Term inductions or term spontaneous labor in the index pregnancy was included, and those with a prior sPTB were excluded. Data were obtained through chart abstraction. The primary outcome was sPTB (<37 weeks) in a subsequent pregnancy. Categorical variables were compared with χ(2) analyses, and logistic regression was used to calculate odds. RESULTS: Eight hundred eighty-seven women were included (622 inductions, 265 spontaneous labor). The overall subsequent sPTB rate was 7.2%. Term inductions were less likely to have a subsequent sPTB compared with term spontaneous labor (6% vs 11%; odds ratio [OR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-0.81; P = .005). This remained after adjusting for confounders (adjusted OR, 0.55; P = .04). The sPTB risk depended on gestational age of index delivery. At 37-38.9 weeks, the sPTB rate after spontaneous labor was 24% vs 9% after induction (OR, 3.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-6.16; P = .003). This was not significant for 39-39.9 weeks (P = .2) or 40 weeks or longer (P = .8). CONCLUSION: Induction is not a risk factor for subsequent sPTB. Spontaneous labor, however, in the early term period is associated with subsequent sPTB. Further investigation among early term deliveries is warranted to evaluate the risk of sPTB and target interventions in this cohort.
Authors: R L Goldenberg; J D Iams; B M Mercer; P J Meis; A H Moawad; R L Copper; A Das; E Thom; F Johnson; D McNellis; M Miodovnik; J P Van Dorsten; S N Caritis; G R Thurnau; S F Bottoms Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1998-02 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Marta Jozwiak; Kitty W M Bloemenkamp; Anthony J Kelly; Ben Willem J Mol; Olivier Irion; Michel Boulvain Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2012-03-14
Authors: J D Iams; R L Goldenberg; P J Meis; B M Mercer; A Moawad; A Das; E Thom; D McNellis; R L Copper; F Johnson; J M Roberts Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-02-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Olga Corazón Irizarry; Lisa D Levine; Jennifer Lewey; Theresa Boyer; Valerie Riis; Michal A Elovitz; Zolt Arany Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Lisa D Levine; Mary D Sammel; Adi Hirshberg; Michal A Elovitz; Sindhu K Srinivas Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2014-09-30 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: L Visser; C Slaager; B M Kazemier; A L Rietveld; M A Oudijk; Cjm de Groot; B W Mol; M A de Boer Journal: BJOG Date: 2020-02-24 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: M D T de Vaan; D Blel; K W M Bloemenkamp; M Jozwiak; M L G Ten Eikelder; J W de Leeuw; M A Oudijk; J J H Bakker; R J P Rijnders; D N Papatsonis; M Woiski; B W Mol; R de Heus Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 7.299