Induction of labour vs. spontaneous vaginal delivery in twin pregnancy after 36 weeks of gestation

Tavares, Mariana Vide; Domingues, Ana Patrícia; Nunes, Filipa; Tavares, Margarida; Fonseca, Etelvina; Moura, Paulo

doi:10.1080/01443615.2016.1205554

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified five studies in relation to twin pregnancy, consisting of a Cochrane review [156], and four retrospective cohort studies [157][158][159][160]. None of the included studies conducted an analysis by chorionicity.…”

Section: Twin Pregnancymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…None of the included studies conducted an analysis by chorionicity. Chorionicity data was unavailable or incomplete in three studies [156,158,159], and two studies had the data but did not perform this sub-analysis [157,160].…”

Section: Twin Pregnancymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A retrospective cohort study by Tavares et al [160] compared outcomes for IOL versus spontaneous vaginal birth in twin pregnancy after 36 weeks of gestation. Of the 288 women with multiple pregnancies during the study period, 75 twin pregnancies >36 weeks of gestation were included, with 33 women undergoing IOL and 42 women who went into labour spontaneously.…”

Section: Twin Pregnancymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour

Coates¹,

Makris²,

Catling³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The proportion of women undergoing induction of labour (IOL) has risen in recent decades, with significant variation within countries and between hospitals. The aim of this study was to review research supporting indications for IOL and determine which indications are supported by evidence and where knowledge gaps exist. Methods A systematic scoping review of quantitative studies of common indications for IOL. For each indication, we included systematic reviews/meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case control studies that compared maternal and neonatal outcomes for different modes or timing of birth. Studies were identified via the databases PubMed, Maternity and Infant Care, CINAHL, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from between April 2008 and November 2019, and also from reference lists of included studies. We identified 2554 abstracts and reviewed 300 full text articles. The quality of included studies was assessed using the RoB 2.0, the ROBINS-I and the ROBIN tool. Results 68 studies were included which related to post-term pregnancy (15), hypertension/preeclampsia (15), diabetes (9), prelabour rupture of membranes (5), twin pregnancy (5), suspected fetal compromise (4), maternal elevated body mass index (BMI) (4), intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (3), suspected macrosomia (3), fetal gastroschisis (2), maternal age (2), and maternal cardiac disease (1). Available evidence supports IOL for women with post-term pregnancy, although the evidence is weak regarding the timing (41 versus 42

show abstract

Section: Twin Pregnancymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Twin Pregnancymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Twin Pregnancymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour

Coates¹,

Makris²,

Catling³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These studies did not find any differences in maternal or neonatal outcomes among women who had induction of labor compared with spontaneous labor. 16,17 These data are reassuring that induction is safe in twins; however, clinically, this does not help providers to answer the pragmatic question about management of delivery for twins who are not in labor but have an indication for delivery. Furthermore, these studies had higher rates of CD among women who underwent induction of labor, with one study reporting a CD rate of 60.6% 17 and another 40.5%.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Induction of Labor versus Cesarean Delivery in Twin Pregnancies

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective This study was aimed to compare maternal and neonatal outcomes between women with twin pregnancies who underwent induction of labor with those women who had planned Cesarean delivery (CD). Study Design This is a retrospective cohort study of women with twin pregnancies ≥ 24 weeks with an indication for delivery but not in labor. Two groups were examined, women who underwent induction and women who underwent planned CD. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between groups both for deliveries at gestational age ≥ 37 weeks and < 37 weeks. Results A total of 453 patients were included. Overall, 212 (46.8%) women underwent induction and 241 (53.2%) underwent planned CD. Women who underwent induction of labor had a high rate of VD, both in the term and preterm groups (69.8 and 73.6%, respectively). Women who underwent induction of labor had reduced maternal length of stay, neonatal length of stay, and blood loss, without any increase in adverse outcomes. Neonatal ventilation of either twin delivered < 37 weeks was higher in the CD compared with induction group (27.5 vs. 9.4%, p < 0.01), but this was not significant on adjusted odds ratio analysis (aOR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.19–2.66). Conclusion Labor induction in twin gestations have improved maternal outcomes and similar neonatal outcomes compared with planned CD.

show abstract

“…33 Second, for obese patients prostaglandins and mechanical methods have a similar efficacy. And third, in case of twin pregnancy, IOL is considered a safe technique although it is associated an increased risk of caesarean [34][35][36] independently of method that has been used Mei-Dan E. 37 Due to the risk of hyperstimulation, dinoprostone vaginal insert device or mechanical methods for unfavourable cervix in case of twin pregnancies are recommended.…”

Section: How Can Induction Of Labour Be Done?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2017

IPCB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to WHO, 25% of all deliveries are induced in developed countries. There are many controversies and multiple guides to induction of labour (IOL) are used in different hospitals. There are social or maternofetal indications to IOL. The way to perform the IOL depends on cervical status. Currently, prostaglandins are considered the most effective method to IOL (delivery before 24hours). Depends on each patient, it is recommended misoprostol or dinoprostone. For cases with contraindications for prostaglandins, mechanical methods (Foley catheter or double balloon intracervical catheter) are good alternatives. In any case, some special circumstances (twins' pregnancies, women with previous caesarean…) must been considered. According to perinatal outcomes, both methods are similar. Although prostaglandins are more costeffective method, women are most satisfied with mechanical methods.

show abstract

Induction of labour vs. spontaneous vaginal delivery in twin pregnancy after 36 weeks of gestation

Cited by 10 publications

References 7 publications

A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour

A systematic scoping review of clinical indications for induction of labour

Induction of Labor versus Cesarean Delivery in Twin Pregnancies

Untitled

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About