(BQ) Part 1 book Williams obstetrics presents the following contents: Overview; maternal anatomy and physiology; placentation, embryogenesis and fetal development; preconceptional and prenatal care, the fetal patient, early pregnancy complications, labor.
Williams OBSTETRICS NOTICE Medicine is an ever-changing science As new research and clinical experience broaden our knowledge, changes in treatment and drug therapy are required The authors and the publisher of this work have checked with sources believed to be reliable in their efforts to provide information that is complete and generally in accord with the standards accepted at the time of publication However, in view of the possibility of human error or changes in medical sciences, neither the authors nor the publisher nor any other party who has been involved in the preparation or publication of this work warrants that the information contained herein is in every respect accurate or complete, and they disclaim all responsibility for any errors or omissions or for the results obtained from use of the information contained in this work Readers are encouraged to confirm the information contained herein with other sources For example and in particular, readers are advised to check the product information sheet included in the package of each drug they plan to administer to be certain that the information contained in this work is accurate and that changes have not been made in the recommended dose or in the contraindications for administration This recommendation is of particular importance in connection with new or infrequently used drugs Williams OBSTETRICS 24TH EDITION F Gary Cunningham Kenneth J Leveno Steven L Bloom Catherine Y Spong Jodi S Dashe Barbara L Hoffman Brian M Casey Jeanne S Sheffield New Yorkk Chicago San Francisco Lisbon London Madrid Mexico Cityy Milan New Delhi San Juan Seoul Singapore Sydneyy Toronto Copyright © 2014 by McGraw-Hill Education All rights reserved Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of the publisher ISBN: 978-0-07-179894-5 MHID: 0-07-179894-3 The material in this eBook also appears in the print version of this title: ISBN: 978-0-07-179893-8, MHID: 0-07-179893-5 eBook conversion by codeMantra Version 1.0 All trademarks are trademarks of their respective owners Rather than put a trademark symbol after every occurrence of a trademarked name, we use names in an editorial fashion only, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark Where such designations appear in this book, they have been printed with initial caps McGraw-Hill Education eBooks are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales promotions or for use in corporate training programs To contact a representative, please visit the Contact Us page at www.mhprofessional.com TERMS OF USE This is a copyrighted work and McGraw-Hill Education and its licensors reserve all rights in and to the work Use of this work is subject to these terms Except as permitted under the Copyright Act of 1976 and the right to store and retrieve one copy of the work, you may not decompile, disassemble, reverse engineer, reproduce, modify, create derivative works based upon, transmit, distribute, disseminate, sell, publish or sublicense the work or any part of it without McGraw-Hill Education’s prior consent You may use the work for your own noncommercial and personal use; any other use of the work is strictly prohibited Your right to use the work may be terminated if you fail to comply with these terms THE WORK IS PROVIDED “AS IS.” McGRAW-HILL EDUCATION AND ITS LICENSORS MAKE NO GUARANTEES OR WARRANTIES AS TO THE ACCURACY, ADEQUACY OR COMPLETENESS OF OR RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED FROM USING THE WORK, INCLUDING ANY INFORMATION THAT CAN BE ACCESSED THROUGH THE WORK VIA HYPERLINK OR OTHERWISE, AND EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ANY WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT IMITED TO IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE McGraw-Hill Education and its licensors not warrant or guarantee that the functions contained in the work will meet your requirements or that its operation will be uninterrupted or error free Neither McGraw-Hill Education nor its licensors shall be liable to you or anyone else for any inaccuracy, error or omission, regardless of cause, in the work or for any damages resulting therefrom McGraw-Hill Education has no responsibility for the content of any information accessed through the work Under no circumstances shall McGraw-Hill Education and/or its licensors be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, punitive, consequential or similar damages that result from the use of or inability to use the work, even if any of them has been advised of the possibility of such damages This limitation of liability shall apply to any claim or cause whatsoever whether such claim or cause arises in contract, tort or otherwise EDITORS F Gary Cunningham, MD Jodi S Dashe, MD Beatrice and Miguel Elias Distinguished Chair in Obstetrics and Gynecology Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Medical Director of Prenatal Diagnosis and Genetics Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Kenneth J Leveno, MD Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Jack A Pritchard Chair in Obstetrics and Gynecology Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Steven L Bloom, MD Mary Dees McDermott Hicks Chair in Medical Science Professor and Chair, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Catherine Y Spong, MD Bethesda, Maryland Barbara L Hoffman, MD Brian M Casey, MD Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Director, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Chief of Obstetrics Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Jeanne S Sheffield, MD Alvin “Bud” Brekken Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Fellowship Director, Maternal-Fetal Medicine University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Medical Director of Prenatal Clinics Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas v ASSOCIATE EDITORS Diane M Twickler, MD Mala S Mahendroo, PhD Dr Fred Bonte Professorship in Radiology Professor, Department of Radiology and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Medical Director of Obstetrics and Gynecology Ultrasonography Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Green Center for Reproductive Biological Sciences University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Dallas, Texas CONTRIBUTING EDITORS vi Kevin C Worley, MD Donald D McIntire, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Associate Residency Program Director University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Biostatistician Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas J Seth Hawkins, MD, MBA Lewis E Calver, MS, CMI, FAMI Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas Parkland Health and Hospital System Dallas, Texas Faculty Associate, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas DEDICATION These are trying times for academic medicine They are especially vexing for departments of obstetrics and gynecology Combined with draconian funding shortages, there is burdensome oversight with sometimes meaningless regulations as well as myriad forms and paperwork foisted upon us by an ever-increasing but already bloated bureaucracy Despite these seemingly overwhelming challenges, the chairs of academic departments and the directors of residency training programs resiliently continue to emphasize the basics that are fundamental to academic training It is to these stalwart individuals that we dedicate this 24th edition of Williams Obstetrics vii This page intentionally left blank CONTENTS Preface xv Acknowledgments xvii SECTION OVERVIEW Overview of Obstetrics SECTION MATERNAL ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY Maternal Anatomy 16 Maternal Physiology 46 Congenital Genitourinary Abnormalities 36 SECTION PLACENTATION, EMBRYOGENESIS, AND FETAL DEVELOPMENT Implantation and Placental Development 80 Embryogenesis and Fetal Morphological Development 127 Placental Abnormalities 116 ix 520 Labor SECTION without acidic liquid may lead to patchy atelectasis and later to bronchopneumonia When highly acidic liquid is inspired, decreased oxygen saturation along with tachypnea, bronchospasm, rhonchi, rales, atelectasis, cyanosis, tachycardia, and hypotension are likely to develop At the injury sites, there is pulmonary capillary leakage and exudation of protein-rich fluid containing numerous erythrocytes into the lung interstitium and alveoli This causes decreased pulmonary compliance, shunting of blood, and severe hypoxemia Radiographic changes may not appear immediately, and these may be variable, although the right lung most often is affected Therefore, chest radiographs alone should not be used to exclude aspiration Treatment The methods recommended for treatment of aspiration have changed appreciably in recent years, indicating that previous therapy was not very successful Suspicion of aspiration of gastric contents demands close monitoring for evidence of pulmonary damage Respiratory rate and oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry are the most sensitive and earliest indicators of injury Inhaled fluid should be immediately and thoroughly wiped from the mouth and removed from the pharynx and trachea by suction Saline lavage may further disseminate the acid throughout the lung and is not recommended If large particulate matter is inspired, bronchoscopy may be indicated to relieve airway obstruction There is no convincing clinical or experimental evidence that corticosteroid therapy or prophylactic antimicrobial administration is beneficial (Marik, 2001) If clinical evidence of infection develops, however, then vigorous treatment is given If acute respiratory distress syndrome develops, mechanical ventilation with positive end-expiratory pressure may prove lifesaving (Chap 47, p 944) REFERENCES Abrão KC, Francisco RP, Miyadahira S, et al: Elevation of uterine basal tone and fetal heart rate abnormalities after labor analgesia: a randomized controlled trial Obstet Gynecol 113(10):41, 2009 Alexander JM, Sharma SK, McIntire DD, et al: Epidural analgesia lengthens the Friedman active phase of labor Obstet Gynecol 100:46, 2002 American Academy of Pediatrics and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Guidelines for Perinatal Care, 7th ed Washington, 2012 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Oral intake during labor Committee Opinion No 441, September 2009, Reaffirmed 2013a American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Obstetric analgesia and anesthesia Practice Bulletin 36, July 2002, Reaffirmed 2013b American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Society of Anesthesiologists: Pain relief during labor Committee Opinion No 295, July 2004, Reaffirmed 2008 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Society of Anesthesiologists: Optimal goals for anesthesia care in obstetrics Committee Opinion No.433, May 2009 American Society of Anesthesiologists: ASA Statement on Sodium thiopental’s removal from the market, January 21, 2011 Available at: http://www.asahq org/For-the-Public-and-Media/Press-Room/ASA-News/ASA-Statementon-Thiopental-Removal-from-the-Market.aspx Accessed August 1, 2013 American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetrical Anesthesia: Practice guidelines for obstetrical anesthesia Anesthesiology 106:843, 2007 Arkoosh V, Palmer C, Yun E, et al: A randomized, double-masked, multicenter comparison of the safety of continuous intrathecal labor analgesia using a 28-gauge catheter versus continuous epidural labor analgesia Anesthesiology 108(2):286, 2008 Atkinson BD, Truitt LJ, Rayburn WF, et al: Double-blind comparison of intravenous butorphanol (Stadol) and fentanyl (Sublimaze) for analgesia during labor Am J Obstet Gynecol 171:993, 1994 Beamon C, Stuebe A, Edwards L, et al: Effect of mode of regional anesthesia on neonatal outcomes in preeclamptic patients Am J Obstet Gynecol 210:S173, 2014 Bell ED, Penning DH, Cousineau EF, et al: How much labor is in a labor epidural? Manpower cost and reimbursement for an obstetric analgesia service in a teaching institution Anesthesiology 92:851, 2000 Berg CJ, Callaghan WM, Syverson C, et al: Pregnancy-related mortality in the United States, 1998 to 2005 Obstet Gynecol 116:1302, 2010 Bloom SL, Spong CY, Weiner SJ, et al: Complications of anesthesia for cesarean delivery Obstet Gynecol 106:281, 2005 Bricker L, Lavender T: Parenteral opioids for labor pain relief: A systematic review Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:S94, 2002 Brookfield K, Osmundson S, Jaqvi M, et al: General anesthesia at cesarean delivery portends worse maternal and neonatal outcomes Abstract No 672 Am J Obstet Gynecol 208(1 Suppl):S28, 2013 Butler R, Fuller J: Back pain following epidural anaesthesia in labour Can J Anaesth 45:724, 1998 Butwick A, Blumenfeld Y, Brookfeld K, et al: Ethnic disparities among patients undergoing general anesthesia for cesarean delivery Am J Obstet Gynecol 210:S259, 2014 Camann WR, Murray RS, Mushlin PS, et al: Effects of oral caffeine on postdural puncture headache: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial Anesth Analg 70:181, 1990 Campagna JA, Miller KW, Forman SA: Mechanisms of actions of inhaled anesthetics N Engl J Med 348:2110, 2003 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Bacterial meningitis after intrapartum anesthesia—New York and Ohio, 2008–2009 MMWR 59(3):65, 2010 Chan BO, Paech MJ: Persistent cerebrospinal fluid leak: a complication of the combined spinal-epidural technique Anesth Analg 98:828, 2004 Chestnut DH: Effect on the progress of labor and method of delivery In Chestnut DH (ed): Obstetric Anesthesia: Principles and Practice, 2nd ed St Louis: Mosby-Year Book, 1999, p 408 Chestnut DH, McGrath JM, Vincent RD Jr, et al: Does early administration of epidural analgesia affect obstetric outcome in nulliparous women who are in spontaneous labor? Anesthesiology 80:1201, 1994a Chestnut DH, Owen CL, Bates JN, et al: Continuous infusion epidural analgesia during labor: a randomized, double-blind comparison of 0.625% bupivacaine/0.0002% fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine Anesthesiology 68:754, 1988 Chestnut DH, Vincent RD Jr, McGrather JM, et al: Does early administration of epidural analgesia affect obstetric outcome in nulliparous women who are receiving intravenous oxytocin? Anesthesiology 80:1193, 1994b Chisholm ME, Campbell DC: Postpartum postural headache due to superior sagittal sinus thrombosis mistaken for spontaneous intracranial hypotension Can J Anaesth 48:302, 2001 Craig MG, Tao W, McIntire DD, et al: A randomized trial of bupivacaine plus fentanyl versus only fentanyl for epidural analgesia during the second stage of labor Anesth Analg 2014 In press Crawford JS: Some maternal complications of epidural analgesia for labour Anaesthesia 40:1219, 1985 Crawford JS, Burton M, Davies P: Time and lateral tilt at caesarean section Br J Anaesth 44:477, 1972 Danilenko-Dixon DR, Tefft L, Haydon B, et al: The effect of maternal position on cardiac output with epidural analgesia in labor [Abstract] Am J Obstet Gynecol 174:332, 1996 Darouiche RO: Spinal epidural abscess N Engl J Med 355:2012, 2006 Dashe JS, Rogers BB, McIntire DD, et al: Epidural analgesia and intrapartum fever: placental findings Obstet Gynecol 93:341, 1999 Dawley B, Hendrix A: Intracranial subdural hematoma after spinal anesthesia in a parturient Obstet Gynecol 113(2):570, 2009 Dresner M, Brocklesby J, Bamber J: Audit of the influence of body mass index on the performance of epidural analgesia in labour and the subsequent mode of delivery Br J Obstet Gynaecol 113:1178, 2006 Friedman EA: Primigravid labor: a graphicostatistical analysis Obstet Gynecol 6:567, 1955 Fusi L, Steer PJ, Maresh MJA, et al: Maternal pyrexia associated with the use of epidural analgesia in labour Lancet 1:1250, 1989 Gambling DR, Sharma SK, Ramin SM, et al: A randomized study of combined spinal-epidural analgesia versus intravenous meperidine during labor: impact on cesarean delivery rate Anesthesiology 89(6):1336, 1998 Glosten B: Local anesthetic techniques In Chestnut DH (ed): Obstetric Anesthesia: Principles and Practice, 2nd ed St Louis, Mosby-Year Book, 1999, p 363 Obstetrical Analgesia and Anesthesia Mhyre JM, Riesner MN, Polley LS, et al: A series of anesthesia-related maternal deaths in Michigan, 1985–2003 Anesthesiology 106:1096, 2007 Miller N, Cypher R, Thomas S, et al: Admission pulse pressure is a novel predictor of fetal heart rate abnormalities following initial dosing of a labour epidural: a retrospective cohort study Abstract No 333 Am J Obstet Gynecol 208(1 Suppl):S149, 2013 Millet L, Shaha S, Bartholomew ML: Rates of bacteriuria in laboring with epidural analgesia: continuous vs intermittent bladder catheterization Am J Obstet Gynecol 206:316, 2012 Miro M, Guasch E, Gilsanz F: Comparison of epidural analgesia with combined spinal-epidural for labor: a retrospective study of 6497 cases Int J Obstet Anesth 17:15, 2008 Mulroy MF: Systemic toxicity and cardiotoxicity from local anesthetics: incidence and preventive measures Reg Anesth Pain Med 27:556, 2002 Ngan Kee WD, Khaw KS, Ng FF, et al: Prophylactic phenylephrine infusion for preventing hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery Anesth Analg 98:815, 2004 Noblett K, McKinney A, Kim R: Sheared epidural catheter during an elective procedure Obstet Gynecol 109:566, 2007 Norris MC, Dewan DM: Preoxygenation for cesarean section: A comparison of two techniques Anesthesiology 62:827, 1985 Ohel G, Gonen R, Vaida S, et al: Early versus late initiation of epidural analgesia in labor: does it increase the risk of cesarean section? A randomized trial Am J Obstet Gynecol 194:600, 2006 Osterman MJK, Martin JA: Epidural and spinal anesthesia use during labor, 2008 Natl Vital Stat Rep 59(5):1, 2011a Osterman MJK, Martin JA, Mathews TJ, et al: Expanded data from the new birth certificate, 2008 Natl Vital Stat Rep 59(7):1, 2011b O’Sullivan G, Liu B, Hart D, et al: Effect of food intake during labour on obstetric outcome: randomised controlled trial BMJ 338:b784, 2009 Quilligan EJ, Keegan KA, Donahue MJ: Double-blind comparison of intravenously injected butorphanol and meperidine in parturients Int J Gynaecol Obstet 18:363, 1980 Quinn AC, Milne D, Columb M, et al: Failed tracheal intubation in obstetric anaesthesia: yr national case-control study in the UK Br J Anaesth 110(1):74, 2013 Ramin SM, Gambling DR, Lucas MJ, et al: Randomized trial of epidural versus intravenous analgesia during labor Obstet Gynecol 86(5):783, 1995 Reynolds F, Sharma SK, Seed PT: Analgesia in labour and fetal acid-base balance: a meta-analysis comparing epidural with systemic opioid analgesia Br J Obstet Gynaecol 109:1344, 2002 Rogers R, Gilson G, Kammerer-Doak D: Epidural analgesia and active management of labor: effects on length of labor and mode of delivery Obstet Gynecol 93:995, 1999 Rosen MA: Nitrous oxide for relief of labor pain: a systematic review Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:S110, 2002a Rosen MA: Paracervical block for labor analgesia: a brief historic review Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:S127, 2002b Ruppen W, Derry S, McQuay H, et al: Incidence of epidural hematoma, infection, and neurologic injury in obstetric patients with epidural analgesia/ anesthesia Anesthesiology 105:394, 2006 Scavone BM, Wong CA, Sullivan JT, et al: Efficacy of a prophylactic epidural blood patch in preventing post dural puncture headache in parturients after inadvertent dural puncture Anesthesiology 101:1422, 2004 Setayesh AR, Kholdebarin AR, Moghadam MS, et al: The Trendelenburg position increases the spread and accelerates the onset of epidural anesthesia for cesarean section Can J Anaesth 48:890, 2001 Seyb ST, Berka RJ, Socol ML, et al: Risk of cesarean delivery with elective induction of labor at term in nulliparous women Obstet Gynecol 94:600, 1999 Sharma SK, Alexander JM, Messick G, et al: Cesarean delivery: a randomized trial of epidural analgesia versus intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor in nulliparous women Anesthesiology 96(3):546, 2002 Sharma SK, Leveno KJ: Regional analgesia and progress of labor Clin Obstet Gynecol 46:633, 2003 Sharma SK, McIntire DD, Wiley J, et al: Labor analgesia and cesarean delivery An individual patient meta-analysis of nulliparous women Anesthesiology 100:142, 2004 Sharma SK, Rogers BB, Alexander JM, et al: A randomized trial of the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis on epidural related fever in labor Anesth Analg 2014 In press Sharma SK, Sidawi JE, Ramin SM, et al: Cesarean delivery: a randomized trial of epidural versus patient-controlled meperidine analgesia during labor Anesthesiology 87:487, 1997 Shearer VE, Jhaveri HS, Cunningham FG: Puerperal seizures after post-dural puncture headache Obstet Gynecol 85:255, 1995 CHAPTER 25 Grant GJ: Safely giving regional anesthesia to gravidas with clotting disorders Contemp OB Gyn August, 2007 Halpern SH, Carvalho B: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia for labor Anesth Analg 108(3):921, 2009 Hants Y, Kabiri D, Gat R, et al: Neuraxial analgesia may reduce the risk for cesarean delivery during induced labor Abstract No 339 Am J Obstet Gynecol 208(1 Suppl):S151, 2013 Hatjis CG, Meis PJ: Sinusoidal fetal heart rate pattern associated with butorphanol administration Obstet Gynecol 67:377, 1986 Hawkins JL: Epidural analgesia for labor and delivery N Engl J Med 362:1503, 2010 Hawkins JL, Chang J, Palmer SK, et al: Anesthesia-related maternal mortality in the United States: 1979–2002 Obstet Gynecol 117:69, 2011 Hawkins JL, Koonin LM, Palmer SK, et al: Anesthesia-related deaths during obstetric delivery in the United States, 1979–1990 Anesthesiology 86:277, 1997 Heller PJ, Scheider EP, Marx GF: Pharyngolaryngeal edema as a presenting symptom in preeclampsia Obstet Gynecol 62:523, 1983 Hess PE, Pratt SD, Lucas TP, et al: Predictors of breakthrough pain during labor epidural analgesia Anesth Analg 93:414, 2001 Hill JB, Alexander JM, Sharma SK, et al: A comparison of the effects of epidural and meperidine analgesia during labor on fetal heart rate Obstet Gynecol 102:333, 2003 Hinebaugh M, Lang W: Continuous spinal anesthesia for labor and delivery: a preliminary report Ann Surg 120(2):143, 1944 Hogg B, Hauth JC, Caritis SN, et al: Safety of labor epidural anesthesia for women with severe hypertensive disease Am J Obstet Gynecol 181:1096, 1999 Introna RPS, Blair JR, Neeld JB: What is the incidence of inadvertent dural puncture during epidural anesthesia in obstetrics? Anesthesiology 117(3):686, 2012 Katircioglu K, Hasegeli L, Ibrahimhakkioglu HF, et al: A retrospective review of 34,109 epidural anesthetics for obstetric and gynecologic procedures at a single private hospital in Turkey Anesth Analg 107:1742, 2008 Kennedy WF Jr, Bonica JJ, Akamatsu TJ, et al: Cardiovascular and respiratory effects of subarachnoid block in the presence of acute blood loss Anesthesiology 29:29, 1968 Krivak TC, Zorn KK: Venous thromboembolism in obstetrics and gynecology Obstet Gynecol 109(3):761, 2007 Lee A, Ngan Kee WD, Gin T: A quantitative, systematic review of randomized controlled trials of ephedrine versus phenylephrine for the management of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery Anesth Analg 94:920, 2002a Lee A, Ngan Kee WD, Gin T: Prophylactic ephedrine prevents hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery but does not improve neonatal outcome: a quantitative systematic review Can J Anaesth 49:588, 2002b Lee LA, Posner KL, Domino KB, et al: Injuries associated with regional anesthesia in the 1980s and 1990s: a closed claims analysis Anesthesiology 101:143, 2004 Leighton BL, Halpern SH: The effects of epidural analgesia on labor, maternal, and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:569, 2002 Lewis G (ed): The Confidential Enquiry into Maternal and Child Health (CEMACH) Saving Mothers’ Lives London, CEMACH, 2007 Li G, Warner M, Lang BH et al: Epidemiology of anesthesia-related mortality in the United States, 1999–2005 Anesthesiology 110(4):759, 2009 Lieberman E, Lang JM, Cohen A, et al: Association of epidural analgesia with cesarean delivery in nulliparas Obstet Gynecol 88:993, 1996 Lieberman E, O’Donoghue C: Unintended effects of epidural analgesia during labor: a systematic review Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:531, 2002 Liu SS, Lin Y: Local anesthetics In Barash P, Cullen B, Stoeling R, et al (eds): Clinical Anesthesia, 6th ed Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009, p 541 Liu WH, Lin JH, Lin JC, et al: Severe intracranial and intraspinal subarachnoid hemorrhage after lumbar puncture: a rare case report Am J Emerg Med 26:633, 2008 Lucas MJ, Sharma SK, McIntire DD, et al: A randomized trial of labor analgesia in women with pregnancy-induced hypertension Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:970, 2001 Luxman D, Wholman I, Groutz A, et al: The effect of early epidural block administration on the progression and outcome of labor Int J Obstet Anesth 7:161, 1998 Manninen T, Aantaa R, Salonen M, et al: A comparison of the hemodynamic effects of paracervical block and epidural anesthesia for labor analgesia Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 44:441, 2000 Marik PE: Aspiration pneumonitis and aspiration pneumonia N Engl J Med 344:665, 2001 McClelland SH, Bogod DG, Hardman JG: Pre-oxygenation and apnoea in pregnancy: changes during labour and with obstetric morbidity in a computational simulation Anaesthesia 64(4):371, 2009 521 522 Labor SECTION Smarkusky L, DeCarvalho H, Bermudez A, et al: Acute onset headache complicating labor epidural caused by intrapartum pneumocephalus Obstet Gynecol 108:795, 2006 Sprigge JS, Harper SJ: Accidental dural puncture and post dural puncture headache in obstetric anaesthesia: presentation and management: a 23-year survey in a district general hospital Anaesthesia 63:36, 2008 Svancarek W, Chirino O, Schaefer G Jr, et al: Retropsoas and subgluteal abscesses following paracervical and pudendal anesthesia JAMA 237:892, 1977 Taylor G, Pryse-Davies J: The prophylactic use of antacids in the prevention of the acid pulmonary aspiration syndrome (Mendelson’s syndrome) Lancet 1:288, 1966 Teabeaut JR II: Aspiration of gastric contents: an experimental study Am J Pathol 28:51, 1952 Tsui MHY, Kee WDN, Ng FF, et al: A double blinded randomized placebo controlled study of intramuscular pethidine for pain relief in the first stage of labour Br J Obstet Gynaecol 111:648, 2004 Vallejo MC, Mandell GL, Sabo DP, et al: Postdural puncture headache: a randomized comparison of five spinal needles in obstetric patients Anesth Analg 91:916, 2000 Vricella LK, Louis JM, Mercer BM, et al: Impact of morbid obesity on epidural anesthesia complications in labor Am J Obstet Gynecol 205:307, 2011 Wallace DH, Leveno KJ, Cunningham FG, et al: Randomized comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean delivery in pregnancies complicated by severe preeclampsia Obstet Gynecol 86:193, 1995 Wong CA, McCarthy RJ, Sullivan JT, et al: Early compared with late neuraxial analgesia in nulliparous labor induction Obstet Gynecol 113(5):1066, 2009 Wong CA, Scavone BM, Peaceman AM, et al: The risk of cesarean delivery with neuraxial analgesia given early versus late in labor N Engl J Med 352:655, 2005 Yancey MK, Pierce B, Schweitzer D, et al: Observations on labor epidural analgesia and operative delivery rates Am J Obstet Gynecol 180:353, 1999 Yancey MK, Zhang J, Schweitzer DL, et al: Epidural analgesia and fetal head malposition at vaginal delivery Obstet Gynecol 97:608, 2001 Young MJ, Gorlin AW, Modes VE, et al: Clinical implications of the transversus abdominis plane block in adults Anesthesiol Res Pract 2012:731645, 2012 Zeeman GG, Cunningham FG, Pritchard JA: The magnitude of hemoconcentration with eclampsia Hypertens Preg 28(2):127, 2009 Zhang J, Yancey MK, Klebanoff MA, et al: Does epidural analgesia prolong labor and increase risk of cesarean delivery? A natural experiment Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:128, 2001 523 CHAPTER 26 Induction and Augmentation of Labor LABOR INDUCTION PREINDUCTION CERVICAL RIPENING CERVICAL “FAVORABILITY” 525 ■ Indications 525 Induction is indicated when the benefits to either mother or fetus outweigh those of pregnancy continuation The more common indications include membrane rupture without labor, gestational hypertension, oligohydramnios, nonreassuring fetal status, postterm pregnancy, and various maternal medical conditions such as chronic hypertension and diabetes (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2013b) 526 528 METHODS OF INDUCTION AND AUGMENTATION 528 529 529 ■ Contraindications 531 Methods to induce or augment labor are contraindicated by most conditions that preclude spontaneous labor or delivery The few maternal contraindications are related to prior uterine incision type, contracted or distorted pelvic anatomy, abnormally implanted placentas, and uncommon conditions such as active genital herpes infection or cervical cancer Fetal factors include appreciable macrosomia, severe hydrocephalus, malpresentation, or nonreassuring fetal status PROSTAGLANDIN E1 OXYTOCIN LABOR INDUCTION PHARMACOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES MECHANICAL TECHNIQUES 523 AMNIOTOMY FOR INDUCTION AND AUGMENTATION Induction implies stimulation of contractions before the spontaneous onset of labor, with or without ruptured membranes When the cervix is closed and uneffaced, labor induction will often commence with cervical ripening, g a process that generally employs prostaglandins to soften and open the cervix Augmentation refers to enhancement of spontaneous contractions that are considered inadequate because of failed cervical dilation and fetal descent In the United States, the incidence of labor induction more than doubled from 9.5 percent in 1991 to 23.2 percent in 2011 (Martin, 2013) The incidence is variable between practices At Parkland Hospital approximately 35 percent of labors are induced or augmented By comparison, at the University of Alabama at Birmingham Hospital, labor is induced in approximately 20 percent of women, and another 35 percent are given oxytocin for augmentation—a total of 55 percent This chapter includes an overview of indications for labor induction and augmentation and a description of various techniques to effect preinduction cervical ripening ■ Techniques Oxytocin has been used for decades to induce or augment labor Other effective methods include prostaglandins, such as misoprostol and dinoprostone, and mechanical methods that encompass stripping of membranes, artificial rupture of membranes, extraamnionic saline infusion, transcervical balloons, and hygroscopic cervical dilators Importantly, and as recommended in Guidelines for Perinatal Care, each obstetrical department should have its own written protocols that describe administration of these methods for labor induction and augmentation (American Academy of Pediatrics and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2012) 524 Labor SECTION ■ Risks Uterine Atony Maternal complications associated with labor induction consist of cesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, uterine scar rupture, and postpartum hemorrhage from uterine atony Postpartum hemorrhage from uterine atony is more common in women undergoing induction or augmentation And, atony with intractable hemorrhage, especially during cesarean delivery, is a frequent indication for peripartum hysterectomy (Shellhaas, 2009) In a study from Parkland Hospital, labor induction was associated with 17 percent of 553 emergency peripartum hysterectomies (Hernandez, 2013) In the United States, Bateman and coworkers (2012) reported that the postpartum hysterectomy rate increased 15 percent between 1994 and 2007 This was largely attributable to increased rates of atony associated with more medical labor inductions and more primary and repeat cesarean deliveries Finally, elective induction was associated with more than a threefold increased rate of hysterectomy in the analysis by Bailit and colleagues (2010) Cesarean Delivery Rate This is especially increased in nulliparas undergoing induction (Luthy, 2004; Yeast, 1999) Indeed, several investigators have reported a two- to threefold increased risk (Hoffman, 2003; Maslow, 2000; Smith, 2003) Moreover, these rates are inversely related with cervical favorability at induction, that is, the Bishop scoree (Vahratian, 2005; Vrouenraets, 2005) The increased risk for cesarean delivery with labor induction does not appear to be lowered with preinduction cervical ripening in the nullipara with an unfavorable cervix (Mercer, 2005) In fact, the cesarean delivery rate following elective induction was significantly increased even in women with a Bishop score of or greater compared with that in those with spontaneous labor (Hamar, 2001) Station and position of the fetal vertex may also affect success rates For example, in nulliparas at > 41 weeks’ gestation and with an unengaged vertex, the cesarean delivery rate was increased 12-fold compared with that in women with an engaged fetal vertex (Shin, 2004) The premise that elective labor induction increases the risk of cesarean delivery has been questioned (Macones, 2009) Many studies have compared women undergoing labor induction to those laboring spontaneously However, using women undergoing expectant management, Osmundson and colleagues (2010, 2011) reported similar cesarean delivery rates in more than 4000 women undergoing elective induction between 39 and nearly 41 weeks with or without a favorable cervix Currently, this subject remains unresolved Chorioamnionitis Amniotomy is often selected to augment labor (p 531) Women whose labor is managed with amniotomy have an increased incidence of chorioamnionitis compared with those in spontaneous labor (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2013a) Rupture of a Prior Uterine Incision Uterine rupture during labor in women with a history of prior uterine surgery can be catastrophic (Chap 31, p 613) Some of these risks were quantified by Lydon-Rochelle and associates (2001), who reported that the uterine rupture risk is increased threefold for women in spontaneous labor with a uterine scar With oxytocin labor induction without prostaglandins, the risk was fivefold increased, and with prostaglandins, it was strikingly increased 15.6-fold The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network also reported a threefold increased risk of uterine scar rupture with oxytocin, and this was even higher when prostaglandins were also used (Landon, 2004) The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013d) recommends against the use of misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening or labor induction in women with a prior uterine scar (Chap 31, p 615) ■ Elective Labor Induction There can be no doubt that elective induction for convenience has become more prevalent In the United States between 1991 and 2006, rates of early term labor induction increased significantly for all race and ethnicity groups (Murthy, 2011) This was highest for non-Hispanic white women in 2006 In this group, the rate was 20.5 percent if there was either diabetes or hypertension and was percent for women without these indications Clark and coworkers (2009) reported data from 14,955 deliveries at 37 weeks or greater They noted that 32 percent were elective deliveries, and 19 percent were elective labor inductions The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013b) does not endorse this widespread practice Occasional exceptions might include logistical and other reasons such as a risk of rapid labor, a woman who lives a long distance from the hospital, or psychosocial indications We are also of the opinion that routine elective induction at term is not justified because of the increased risks for adverse maternal outcomes Elective delivery before 39 completed weeks is also associated with significant and appreciable adverse neonatal morbidity (Chiossi, 2013; Clark, 2009; Tita, 2009) If elective induction is considered at term, inherent risks must be discussed, informed consent obtained, and guidelines followed as promulgated by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013b), which are detailed in Chapter 31 (p 610) Guidelines to discourage elective inductions have been described by Fisch (2009) and Oshiro (2013) and their associates Both groups reported significant decreases in elective delivery rates following guideline initiation Tanne (2013) surveyed more than 800 United States hospitals and reported that efforts to reduce early term deliveries are succeeding ■ Factors Affecting Successful Induction Several factors increase or decrease the ability of labor induction to achieve vaginal delivery Favorable factors include multiparity, body mass index (BMI) < 30, favorable cervix, and birthweight < 3500 g (Peregrine, 2006; Pevzner, 2009) For both nulliparas and multiparas, Kominiarek and colleagues (2011) found that labor duration to reach the active phase and to complete dilatation was adversely affected by a higher BMI Induction and Augmentation of Labor PREINDUCTION CERVICAL RIPENING As noted, the condition of the cervix—described as cervical “ripeness” or “favorability”—is important to successful labor induction That said, at least some estimates of favorability are highly subjective In either case, there are pharmacological and mechanical methods that can enhance cervical favorability— also termed preinduction cervical ripening g Some of the techniques described may have benefits when compared with oxytocin induction alone (Table 26-1) Some are also quite successful for initiating labor That said, few data support the premise that any of these techniques results in a reduced cesarean delivery rate or in less maternal or neonatal morbidity compared with that in women in whom these methods are not used ■ Cervical “Favorability” One quantifiable method used to predict labor induction outcomes is the score described by Bishop (1964) and presented in Table 26-2 As favorability or Bishop score decreases, the rate of induction to effect vaginal delivery also declines A Bishop score of conveys a high likelihood for a successful induction Put another way, most practitioners would consider that a woman whose cervix is 2-cm dilated, 80-percent effaced, soft, and midposition and with the fetal occiput at –1 station would have a successful labor induction For research purposes, a Bishop score of or less identifies an unfavorable cervix and may be an indication for cervical ripening TABLE 26-1 Some Commonly Used Regimens for Preinduction Cervical Ripening and/or Labor Induction Techniques Pharmacological Prostaglandin E2 Prostaglandin E1a Mechanical Transcervical 36F Foley catheter Hygroscopic dilators a Agent Route/Dose Comments Dinoprostone gel, 0.5 mg Cervical 0.5 mg; repeat Shorter I-D times with oxytocin infusion (Prepidil) in hr; permit doses than oxytocin alone total Dinoprostone insert, Posterior fornix, 10 mg Insert has shorter I-D times than gel 6–12 hr interval from last insert to 10 mg (Cervidil) oxytocin infusion Misoprostol tablet, 100 or 200 μg (Cytotec)b Vaginal, 25 μg; repeat 3–6 hr prn Oral, 50–100 μg; repeat 3–6 hr prn 30-mL balloon Contractions within 30–60 Comparable success with oxytocin for ruptured membranes at term and/or favorable cervix Tachysystole common with vaginal doses > 25 μg Improves Bishop scores rapidly 80-mL balloon more effective Combined with oxytocin infusion is superior to PGE1 vaginally Results improved with EASI with possible decreased infection rate Laminaria, magnesium sulfate Rapidly improves Bishop score May not shorten I-D times with oxytocin Uncomfortable, requires speculum and placement on an examination table Off-label use Tablets must be divided for 25- and 50-μg dose, but drug is evenly dispersed EASI = extraamnionic saline infusion at 30–40 mL/hr; I-D = induction-to-delivery b CHAPTER 26 In many cases, the uterus is simply poorly prepared for labor One example is an “unripe cervix.” Indeed, investigators with the Consortium on Safe Laborr reported that elective induction resulted in vaginal delivery in 97 percent of multiparas and 76 percent of nulliparas, but that induction was more often successful with a ripe cervix (Laughon, 2012a) The increased cesarean delivery risk associated with induction is likely also strongly influenced by the induction attempt duration, especially with an unfavorable cervix (Spong, 2012) Simon and Grobman (2005) concluded that a latent phase as long as 18 hours during induction allowed most of these women to achieve a vaginal delivery without a significantly increased risk of maternal or neonatal morbidity Rouse and associates (2000) recommend a minimum of 12 hours of uterine stimulation with oxytocin after membrane rupture 525 526 Labor TABLE 26-2 Bishop Scoring System Used for Assessment of Inducibility Cervical Factor SECTION Score Dilatation (cm) Effacement (%) Station (–3 to +2) Closed 1–2 3–4 ≥5 0–30 40–50 60–70 ≥ 80 –3 –2 –1 +1, +2 Consistency Position Firm Medium Soft — Posterior Midposition Anterior — From Bishop, 1964 Laughon and coworkers (2011) attempted to simplify the Bishop score by performing a regression analysis on 5610 singleton, uncomplicated deliveries by nulliparas between 370/7 and 416/7 weeks Only cervical dilation, station, and effacement were significantly associated with successful vaginal delivery Thus, a simplified Bishop score, which incorporated only these three parameters, had a similar or improved positive- or negativepredictive value compared with that of the original Bishop score Transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length has been evaluated as a Bishop score alternative Hatfield and associates (2007) performed a metaanalysis of 20 trials in which cervical length was used to predict successful induction Because of study criteria heterogeneity—including the definition of “successful induction”—the authors concluded that the question remains unanswered Both this study and the one by Uzun and colleagues (2013) found that sonographically determined cervical length was not superior to the Bishop score for predicting induction success ■ Pharmacological Techniques Unfortunately, women frequently have an indication for induction but also have an unfavorable cervix Thus, considerable research has been directed toward techniques to “ripen” the cervix before uterine contraction stimulation Importantly, more often than not, techniques used to improve cervical favorability also stimulate contractions and thereby aid subsequent labor induction or augmentation Techniques most commonly used for preinduction cervical ripening and induction include several prostaglandin analogues 30 minutes Doses may be repeated every hours, with a maximum of three doses recommended in 24 hours A 10-mg dinoprostone vaginal insert—Cervidil—is l also approved for cervical ripening This is a thin, flat, rectangular polymeric wafer held within a small, white, mesh polyester sac (Fig 26-1) The sac has a long attached tail to allow easy removal from the vagina The insert provides slower release of medication—0.3 mg/hr—than the gel form Cervidil is used as a single dose placed transversely in the posterior vaginal fornix Lubricant should be used sparingly, if at all, because it can coat the device and hinder dinoprostone release Following insertion, the woman should remain recumbent for at least hours The insert is removed after 12 hours or with labor onset and at least 30 minutes before the administration of oxytocin Most metaanalyses of dinoprostone efficacy report a reduced time to delivery within 24 hours However, they not consistently show a reduction in the cesarean delivery rate Kelly and coworkers (2009) provided a Cochrane review of 63 trials and 10,441 women given vaginal prostaglandins or either placebo or no treatment These investigators reported a higher vaginal delivery rate within 24 hours when prostaglandins were used They also found that cesarean delivery rates were unchanged Similar results were reported after another Cochrane review of intracervical dinoprostone gel by Boulvain and associates (2008) Compared with placebo or no treatment, a reduced risk of cesarean delivery was found only in a subgroup of women Prostaglandin E2 Dinoprostone is a synthetic analogue of prostaglandin E2 It is commercially available in three forms: a gel, a time-release vaginal insert, and a 10-mg suppository The gel and time-release vaginal insert formulations are indicated only for cervical ripening before labor induction However, the 10-mg suppository is indicated for pregnancy termination between 12 and 20 weeks and for evacuation of the uterus after fetal demise up to 28 weeks Local application of dinoprostone is commonly used for cervical ripening (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2013b) Its gel form—Prepidil — l—is available in a 2.5-mL syringe for an intracervical application of 0.5 mg of dinoprostone With the woman supine, the tip of a prefilled syringe is placed intracervically, and the gel is deposited just below the internal cervical os After application, the woman remains reclined for at least FIGURE 26-1 Cervidil vaginal insert contains 10 mg of dinoprostone designed to release approximately 0.3 mg/hr during a 10-hour period Induction and Augmentation of Labor Side Effects Uterine tachysystole has been reported to follow vaginally administered prostaglandin E2 in to percent of women (Hawkins, 2012) Although definitions of uterine activity vary among studies, most use the definition recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013c): Uterine tachysystolee is defined as > contractions in a 10-minute period It should always be qualified by the presence or absence of fetal heart rate abnormalities Uterine hypertonus, hyperstimulation, and hypercontractility are terms no longer defined, and their use is not recommended Because uterine tachysystole associated with fetal compromise may develop when prostaglandins are used with preexisting spontaneous labor, such use is not recommended If tachysystole follows the 10-mg insert, its removal by pulling on the tail of the surrounding net sac will usually reverse this effect Irrigation to remove the gel preparation has not been shown to be helpful The manufacturers recommend caution when these preparations are used in women with ruptured membranes Caution is also recommended when they are used in women with glaucoma or asthma In a review of 189 women with asthma, however, dinoprostone was not associated with asthma worsening or exacerbation (Towers, 2004) Other contraindications listed by the manufacturers include a history of dinoprostone hypersensitivity, suspicion of fetal compromise or cephalopelvic disproportion, unexplained vaginal bleeding, women already receiving oxytocin, those with six or more previous term pregnancies, those with a contraindication to vaginal delivery, or women with a contraindication to oxytocin or who may be endangered by prolonged uterine contractions, for example, those with a history of cesarean delivery or uterine surgery Administration Prostaglandin E2 preparations should only be administered in or near the delivery suite Moreover, uterine activity and fetal heart rate should be monitored (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2013b) These guidelines stem from the risk of uterine tachysystole When contractions begin, they are usually apparent in the first hour and show peak activity in the first hours According to manufacturer guidelines, oxytocin induction that follows prostaglandin use for cervical ripening should be delayed for to 12 hours following prostaglandin E2 gel administration or for at least 30 minutes after removal of the vaginal insert Prostaglandin E1 Misoprostol—Cytotec—is c a synthetic prostaglandin E1 that is approved as a 100- or 200-μg tablet for peptic ulcer prevention It has been used “off label” for preinduction cervical ripening and may be administered orally or vaginally The tablets are stable at room temperature Although widespread, the offlabel use of misoprostol has been controversial (Wagner, 2005; Weeks, 2005) Specifically, G D Searle & Company (Cullen, 2000) notified physicians that misoprostol is not approved for labor induction or abortion At the same time, however, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013b) reaffirmed its recommendation for use of the drug because of proven safety and efficacy It currently is the preferred prostaglandin for cervical ripening at Parkland Hospital Vaginal Administration Numerous studies have reported equivalent or superior efficacy for cervical ripening or labor induction with vaginally administered misoprostol tablets compared with intracervical or intravaginal prostaglandin E2 A metaanalysis of 121 trials also confirmed these findings (Hofmeyr, 2010) Compared with oxytocin or with intravaginal or intracervical dinoprostone, misoprostol increased the vaginal delivery rate within 24 hours Moreover, although the uterine tachysystole rate increased, this did not affect cesarean delivery rates Compared with dinoprostone, misoprostol decreased the need for oxytocin induction, but it increased the frequency of meconium-stained amnionic fluid Higher doses of misoprostol are associated with a decreased need for oxytocin but more uterine tachysystole with and without fetal heart rate changes The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013b) recommends the 25-μg vaginal dose—a fourth of a 100-μg tablet The drug is evenly distributed among these quartered tablets Wing and colleagues (2013) recently described use of a vaginal polymer insert containing 200 μg of PGE1 They compared its efficacy with 10-mg dinoprostone inserts, and preliminary observations are favorable Oral Administration Prostaglandin E1 tablets are also effective when given orally Ho and coworkers (2010) performed a randomized controlled trial comparing titrated oral misoprostol with oxytocin They found similar rates of vaginal delivery and side effects In a metaanalysis of nine trials including nearly 3000 women, however, there were reported improvements in various outcomes with oral misoprostol (Kundodyiwa, 2009) In particular, there was a significantly lower cesarean delivery rate for the five trials comparing oral misoprostol with dinoprostone—relative risk 0.82 For the two trials comparing oral with vaginal misoprostol, oral misoprostol was associated with a lower rate of uterine tachysystole with fetal heart rate changes, but there were no significant differences with respect to rates of cesarean delivery or other outcomes Nitric Oxide Donors Several findings have led to a search for clinical agents that stimulate nitric oxide (NO) production locally (Chanrachakul, 2000a) This is because nitric oxide is likely a mediator of cervical ripening (Chap 21, p 423) Also, cervical nitric oxide metabolite concentrations are increased at the beginning of uterine contractions Last, cervical nitric oxide production is very low in postterm pregnancy (Väisänen-Tommiska, 2003, 2004) CHAPTER 26 with an unfavorable cervix and intact membranes Finally, the Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labor at term (PROBAAT trials) were unblinded, randomized trials comparing these two options (Jozwiak, 2011, 2013a, 2014) There was no difference in cesarean delivery rate, a finding consistent with accompanying metaanalyses 527 528 Labor SECTION Bullarbo and colleagues (2007) reviewed rationale and use of two nitric oxide donors, isosorbide mononitratee and glyceryl trinitrate Isosorbide mononitrate induces cervical cyclooxygenase (COX-2), and it also brings about cervical ultrastructure rearrangement similar to that seen with spontaneous cervical ripening (Ekerhovd, 2002, 2003) Despite this, clinical trials have not shown nitric oxide donors to be as effective as prostaglandin E2 for cervical ripening (Chanrachakul, 2000b; Osman, 2006) Moreover, the addition of isosorbide mononitrate to either dinoprostone or misoprostol did not enhance cervical ripening either in early or term pregnancy nor did it shorten time to vaginal delivery (Collingham, 2010; Ledingham, 2001; Wölfler, 2006) A metaanalysis of 10 trials including 1889 women concluded that nitric oxide donors not appear to be useful for cervical ripening during labor induction (Kelly, 2011) Chorion Amnion Extraamnionic saline 30 mL ■ Mechanical Techniques These include transcervical placement of a Foley catheter with or without extraamnionic saline infusion, hygroscopic cervical dilators, and membrane stripping In a recent metaanalysis of 71 randomized trials including 9722 women, Jozwiak and associates (2012) reported that mechanical techniques reduced the risk of uterine tachysystole compared with prostaglandins, although cesarean delivery rates were unchanged Trials comparing mechanical techniques with oxytocin found a lower rate of cesarean delivery with mechanical methods Trials comparing mechanical techniques with dinoprostone found a higher rate of multiparous women undelivered at 24 hours with mechanical techniques Another metaanalysis done to compare Foley catheter placement with intravaginal dinoprostone inserts also found similar rates of cesarean delivery and less frequent uterine tachysystole (Jozwiak, 2013a) Transcervical Catheter Generally, these techniques are only used when the cervix is unfavorable because the catheter tends to come out as the cervix opens In most cases, a Foley catheter is placed through the internal cervical os, and downward tension is created by taping the catheter to the thigh (Mei-Dan, 2014) A modification of this—extraamnionic saline infusion (EASI)—consists of a constant saline infusion through the catheter into the space between the internal os and placental membranes (Fig 26-2) Karjane and coworkers (2006) reported that chorioamnionitis was significantly less frequent when infusion was done compared with no infusion—6 versus 16 percent A systematic review and metaanalysis of 30 trials found that Foley catheter induction alone compared with prostaglandins resulted in higher infection rates unless saline was infused (Heinemann, 2008) Most studies of transcervical catheters not show a reduction in the cesarean delivery rate compared with prostaglandins Cromi and colleagues (2012) compared a double-tipped Foley catheter and the dinoprostone vaginal insert They found higher rates of delivery within 24 hours with the mechanical technique, but no differences in the cesarean delivery rates The PROBAAT trials, in which cervical ripening with a Foley catheter was compared with FIGURE 26-2 Extraamnionic saline infusion (EASI) through a 26F Foley catheter that is placed through the cervix The 30-mL balloon is inflated with saline and pulled snugly against the internal os, and the catheter is taped to the thigh Room-temperature normal saline is infused through the catheter port of the Foley at 30 or 40 mL/hour by intravenous infusion pump vaginal dinoprostone gel, dinoprostone vaginal inserts, and vaginal misoprostol, reported similar outcomes between the mechanical technique and the prostaglandin agents Also, fewer overall cases of cardiotocographic changes were seen in the mechanical technique group (Jozwiak, 2011, 2013a, 2014; Wang, 2014) Hygroscopic Cervical Dilators Cervical dilatation can be accomplished using hygroscopic osmotic cervical dilators, as described for early pregnancy termination (Chap 18, p 365) These mechanical dilators have been successfully used for more than 40 years when inserted before pregnancy termination They have also been used for cervical ripening before labor induction Intuitive concerns of ascending infection have not been verified Thus, their use appears to be safe, although anaphylaxis has rarely followed laminaria insertion (Lichtenberg, 2004) Dilators are attractive because of their low cost However, placement generally requires a speculum and positioning of the woman on an examination table, which can be cumbersome and uncomfortable A handful of studies performed in the 1990s compared hygroscopic cervical dilators and prostaglandins There were few benefits of this mechanical technique other than cost METHODS OF INDUCTION AND AUGMENTATION Labor induction has primarily been effected with the use of amniotomy, prostaglandins, and oxytocin, alone or in combination Because preinduction cervical ripening frequently eventuates in labor, studies to determine induction efficacy for some Induction and Augmentation of Labor of these agents have produced sometimes confusing results The use of prostaglandins for labor augmentation has generally been considered experimental As discussed on page 527, both vaginal and oral misoprostol are used for either cervical ripening or labor induction Hofmeyr and associates (2010) performed a Cochrane systematic review of agents for labor induction They reported that vaginal misoprostol, followed by oxytocin if needed, compared with oxytocin alone resulted in fewer failures within 24 hours As expected, prostaglandin use led to a higher incidence of uterine tachysystole, but cesarean delivery rates were similar It appears that 100 μg of oral or 25 μg of vaginal misoprostol are similar in efficacy compared with intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women at or near term with either prematurely ruptured membranes or a favorable cervix (Lin, 2005; Lo, 2003) Misoprostol may be associated with an increased rate of uterine tachysystole, particularly at higher doses Also, induction with prostaglandin E1 may prove ineffective and require subsequent induction or augmentation with oxytocin Thus, although there are trade-offs regarding the risks, costs, and ease of administration of each drug, either is suitable for labor induction For labor augmentation, results of a randomized controlled trial showed oral misoprostol, 75 μg given at 4-hour intervals for a maximum of two doses, to be safe and effective (Bleich, 2011) The 75-μg dose was based on a previous dose-finding study (Villano, 2011) Although there was more uterine tachysystole among women with labor augmented with misoprostol, there were no significant differences in the frequency of nonreassuring fetal status or cesarean delivery ■ Oxytocin As discussed, in most instances, preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction are simply a continuum Thus, “ripening” will also stimulate labor If not, induction or augmentation may be continued with solutions of oxytocin given by infusion pump Synthetic oxytocin is one of the most frequently used medications in the United States It was the first polypeptide hormone synthesized, an achievement for which the 1955 Nobel Prize in chemistry was awarded (du Vigneaud, 1953) Oxytocin may be used for labor induction or for augmentation With oxytocin use, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013b) recommends fetal heart rate and contraction monitoring similar to that for any high-risk pregnancy Contractions can be monitored either by palpation or by electronic means (Chap 24, p 497) Intravenous Oxytocin Administration The goal of induction or augmentation is to effect uterine activity sufficient to produce cervical change and fetal descent, while avoiding development of a nonreassuring fetal status In general, oxytocin should be discontinued if the number of contractions persists with a frequency of more than five in a 10-minute period or more than seven in a 15-minute Oxytocin Dosage A 1-mL ampule containing 10 units usually is diluted into 1000 mL of a crystalloid solution and administered by infusion pump A typical infusate consists of 10 or 20 units, which is 10,000 or 20,000 mU or one or two 1-mL vials, mixed into 1000 mL of lactated Ringer solution This mixture results in an oxytocin concentration of 10 or 20 mU/mL, respectively To avoid bolus administration, the infusion should be inserted into the main intravenous line close to the venipuncture site Oxytocin is generally very successful when used to stimulate labor A Cochrane metaanalysis of 12 trials involving 12,819 women comparing oxytocin with expectant management reported that fewer women—8 versus 54 percent—failed to deliver vaginally within 24 hours when oxytocin was used (Alfirevic, 2009) This metaanalysis studied different oxytocin dosing regimens A smaller metaanalysis of four trials involving 660 women and comparing high-dose and low-dose oxytocin regimens reported that high-dose regimens were associated with reduced length of labor and cesarean delivery rate and with a concomitant increased spontaneous vaginal delivery rate (Mori, 2011) Oxytocin Regimens As a result of numerous studies, several regimens for labor stimulation are now recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013a) These and others are shown in Table 26-3 Initially, only variations of low-dose protocols were used in the United States Then O’Driscoll and colleagues (1984) described their Dublin protocol for the active management of labor that called for oxytocin at a starting dosage of mU/min and advanced in 6-mU/min increments Subsequent comparative trials during the 1990s studied highdose—4 to 6 mU/min—versus conventional low-dose—0.5 to 1.5 mU/min—regimens, both for labor induction and for augmentation From Parkland Hospital, Satin and associates (1992) evaluated an oxytocin regimen using an initial and incremental dosage of mU/min compared with one using mU/min Increases at 20-minute intervals were provided as needed Among 1112 women undergoing induction, the 6-mU/min regimen resulted in a shorter mean admission-to-delivery time, fewer failed inductions, and no cases of neonatal sepsis Among 1676 women who had labor augmentation, those who received the 6-mU/min regimen had a shorter duration-to-delivery CHAPTER 26 ■ Prostaglandin E1 period or with a persistent nonreassuring fetal heart rate pattern Oxytocin discontinuation nearly always rapidly decreases contraction frequency When oxytocin is stopped, its concentration in plasma rapidly falls because the half-life is approximately to minutes Seitchik and coworkers (1984) found that the uterus contracts within to minutes of beginning an oxytocin infusion and that a plasma steady state is reached in 40 minutes Response is highly variable and depends on preexisting uterine activity, cervical status, pregnancy duration, and individual biological differences Caldeyro-Barcia and Poseiro (1960) reported that the uterine response to oxytocin increases from 20 to 30 weeks’ gestation and increases rapidly at term (Chap 24, p 498) 529 530 Labor TABLE 26-3 Various Low- and High-Dose Oxytocin Regimens Used for Labor Induction SECTION Regimen High-dose Starting Dose (mU/min) Incremental Increase (mU/min) 0.5–1.5 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 25, 30 4.5 6a 4.5 Interval (min) 15–40 15 15 15–30 20–40b a With uterine tachysystole and after oxytocin infusion is discontinued, it is restarted at the previous dose and increased at mU/min incremental doses b Uterine tachysystole is more common with shorter intervals Data from Merrill, 1999; Satin, 1992, 1994; Xenakis, 1995 percent As perhaps expected, uterine tachysystole was significantly more frequent with the 20-minute escalation regimen Other investigators reported even more frequent incremental increases Frigoletto (1995) and Xenakis (1995) and their coworkers gave oxytocin at mU/min with increases as needed every 15 minutes Merrill and Zlatnik (1999) started with 4.5 mU/min, with increases every 30 minutes López-Zeno and associates (1992) began at mU/min with increases every 15 minutes Thus, there are several acceptable oxytocin protocols that at least appear dissimilar But a comparison of protocols from two institutions indicates that this is not so: The Parkland Hospital protocol calls for a starting dose of oxytocin at mU/min and with 6-mU/min increases every 40 minutes, but it employs flexible dosing based on uterine tachysystole The University of Alabama at Birmingham Hospital protocol begins oxytocin at mU/min and increases it as needed every 15 minutes to 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 25, and 30 mU/min Thus, although the regimens at first appear disparate, if there is no uterine activity, either regimen is delivering 12 mU/ by 45 minutes into the infusion time, fewer forceps deliveries, fewer cesarean deliveries for dystocia, and decreased rates of intrapartum chorioamnionitis or neonatal sepsis With this protocol, uterine tachysystole is managed by oxytocin discontinuation followed by resumption when indicated and at half the stopping dosage Thereafter, the dosage is increased at mU/min when appropriate, instead of the usual 6-mU/min increase used for women without tachysystole No adverse neonatal effects were observed Xenakis and coworkers (1995) reported benefits using an incremental oxytocin regimen starting at mU/min In a comparative study of 1307 women by Merrill and Zlatnik (1999), 816 women were randomized for labor induction and 816 for augmentation with incremental oxytocin given at either 1.5 or 4.5 mU/min Women randomized to the 4.5 mU/min dosage had significantly decreased mean durations of induction-tosecond-stage labor and induction-to-delivery Nulliparas randomized to the 4.5 mU/min dosage had a significantly lower cesarean delivery rate for dystocia compared with those given 1.5 mU/min dosage—5.9 versus 11.9 percent Thus, benefits favor higher-dose regimens of 4.5 to mU/ compared with lower dosages of 0.5 to 1.5 mU/min In 1990 at Parkland Hospital, routine use of the 6-mU/min oxytocin beginning and incremental dosage was incorporated and continues through today In other labor units, a 2-mU/min beginning and incremental oxytocin regimen is preferred and administered With either regimen, these dosages are employed for either labor induction or augmentation Interval between Incremental Dosing Intervals to increase oxytocin doses vary from 15 to 40 minutes as shown in Table 26-3 Satin and colleagues (1994) addressed this aspect with a 6-mU/min regimen providing increases at either 20- or 40-minute intervals Women assigned to the 20-minute interval regimen for labor augmentation had a significantly reduced cesarean delivery rate for dystocia compared with that for the 40-minute interval regimen—8 versus 12 Maximal Dosage The maximall effective dose of oxytocin to achieve adequate contractions in all women is different Wen and colleagues (2001) studied 1151 consecutive nulliparas and found that the likelihood of progression to vaginal delivery decreased at and beyond an oxytocin dosage of 36 mU/min Still, at a dosage of 72 mU/min, half of the nulliparas were delivered vaginally Thus, if contractions are not adequate—less than 200 Montevideo units—and if the fetal status is reassuring and labor has arrested, an oxytocin infusion dose greater than 48 mU/min has no apparent risks Risks versus Benefits Unless the uterus is scarred, uterine rupture associated with oxytocin infusion is rare, even in parous women (Chap 41, p 790) Flannelly and associates (1993) reported no uterine ruptures, with or without oxytocin, in 27,829 nulliparas There were eight instances of overt uterine rupture during labor in 48,718 parous women Only one of these was associated with oxytocin use Oxytocin has amino-acid homology similar to arginine vasopressin Because of this, it has significant antidiuretic action, and when infused at doses of 20 mU/min or more, renal free water clearance decreases markedly If aqueous fluids are infused in appreciable amounts along with oxytocin, water intoxication can lead to convulsions, coma, and even death In general, if oxytocin is to be administered in high doses for a considerable period of time, its concentration should be increased rather than increasing the flow rate of a more dilute solution Consideration also should be given to use of crystalloids—either normal saline or lactated Ringer solution Uterine Contraction Pressures Contraction forces in spontaneously laboring women range from 90 to 390 Montevideo units As described in Chapter 24 Induction and Augmentation of Labor Active-Phase Arrest First-stage arrest of labor is defined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013a) as a completed latent phase along with contractions exceeding 200 Montevideo units for more than hours without cervical change Some investigators have attempted to define a more accurate duration for activephase arrest (Spong, 2012) Arulkumaran and coworkers (1987) extended the 2-hour limit to hours and reported a 1.3-percent cesarean delivery rate in women who continued to have adequate contractions and progressive cervical dilatation of at least cm/ hr In women without progressive cervical dilatation who were allowed another hours of labor, half required cesarean delivery Rouse and colleagues (1999) prospectively managed 542 women at term with active-phase arrest and no other complications Their protocol was to achieve a sustained pattern of at least 200 Montevideo units for a minimum of hours This time frame was extended to hours if activity of 200 Montevideo units or greater could not be sustained Almost 92 percent of these women were delivered vaginally As discussed in Chapter 23 (p 459), these and other studies support the practice of allowing an active-phase arrest of hours (Rouse, 2001; Solheim, 2009) Zhang and coworkers (2002) analyzed labor duration from cm to complete dilatation in 1329 nulliparas at term They found that before dilatation of cm was reached, lack of progress for more than hours was not uncommon in those who delivered vaginally Alexander and associates (2002) reported that epidural analgesia prolonged active labor by hour compared with duration of the active phase as defined by Friedman (1955) Consideration of these changes in the management of labor, especially in nulliparas, may safely reduce the cesarean delivery rate As data have accrued, investigators have increasingly questioned the thresholds for labor arrest disorders established by Friedman and others in the 1960s In particular, investigators with the Consortium on Safe Laborr reported that half of cases of dystocia after labor induction occurred before cm of cervical dilation (Boyle, 2013; Zhang, 2010c) Even for women with spontaneous labor, these researchers found that active-phase labor was more likely to occur at cm, and after slow progress between and cm (Zhang, 2010a) Additionally, they reported that a 2-hour threshold for diagnosing arrest disorders may be too brief when cervical dilation is < cm (Zhang, 2010b) It was also shown that the duration of first-stage labor was more than hours longer than had been reported using data from the Collaborative Perinatal Project (Laughon, 2012b) ■ Amniotomy for Induction and Augmentation A common indication for artificial rupture of the membranes— surgical amniotomy—includes y the need for direct monitoring of the fetal heart rate or uterine contractions or both During amniotomy, to minimize cord prolapse risk, dislodgement of the fetal head is avoided For this, fundal or suprapubic pressure or both may be helpful Some clinicians prefer to rupture membranes during a contraction If the vertex is not well applied to the lower uterine segment, a gradual egress of amnionic fluid can sometimes be accomplished by several membrane punctures with a 26-gauge needle held with a ring forceps and with direct visualization using a vaginal speculum In many of these, however, membranes tear and fluid is lost rapidly Because of the risk of cord prolapse or rarely abruption, the fetal heart rate is assessed before and immediately after amniotomy Elective Amniotomy Membrane rupture with the intention of accelerating labor is often performed In the investigations presented in Table 26-4, amniotomy at approximately 5-cm dilation accelerated spontaneous labor by to 1½ hours Importantly, neither the need for oxytocin stimulation nor the overall cesarean delivery rate was increased Although mild and moderate cord compression patterns were increased following amniotomy, cesarean delivery rates for fetal distress were not increased Most importantly, there were no adverse perinatal effects Amniotomy Induction Artificial rupture of the membranes—sometimes called surgical induction—can be used to induce labor, and it always implies a commitment to delivery The main disadvantage of amniotomy used alone for labor induction is the unpredictable and occasionally long interval until labor onset That said, in a randomized trial, Bakos and Bäckström (1987) found that amniotomy alone or combined with oxytocin was superior to oxytocin alone Mercer and colleagues (1995) randomized 209 women undergoing oxytocin induction to either early amniotomy at to cm or late amniotomy at cm Early amniotomy was associated with a significant 4-hour reduction in labor duration With early amniotomy, however, there was an increased incidence of chorioamnionitis Amniotomy Augmentation It is common practice to perform amniotomy when labor is abnormally slow Rouse and associates (1994) found that amniotomy CHAPTER 26 (p 498), the latter are calculated by subtracting the baseline uterine pressure from the peak contraction pressure for each contraction in a 10-minute window The pressures generated by each contraction are then summed Caldeyro-Barcia (1950) and Seitchik (1984) with their coworkers found that the mean or median spontaneous uterine contraction pattern resulting in a progression to a vaginal delivery was between 140 and 150 Montevideo units In the management of active-phase arrest, and with no contraindication to intravenous oxytocin, decisions must be made with knowledge of the safe upper range of uterine activity Hauth and colleagues (1986) described an effective and safe protocol for oxytocin augmentation for active-phase arrest With it, more than 90 percent of women achieved an average of at least 200 to 225 Montevideo units Hauth and associates (1991) later reported that nearly all women in whom active-phase arrest persisted despite oxytocin generated more than 200 Montevideo units Importantly, despite no labor progression, there were no adverse maternal or perinatal effects in those undergoing cesarean delivery There are no data regarding safety and efficacy of contraction patterns in women with a prior cesarean delivery, with twins, or with an overdistended uterus 531 532 Labor TABLE 26-4 Randomized Clinical Trials of Elective Amniotomy in Early Spontaneous Labor at Term Effects of Amniotomy SECTION Study Fraser (1993) Garite (1993) UK Amniotomy Group (1994) Number Mean Dilatation at Amniotomy Mean Shortening of Labor Need for Oxytocin 925 459 1463 < cm 5.5 cm 5.1 cm 125 81 60 None Decreased None Cesarean Delivery Rate Nonea None None Abnormal Tracing Neonatal Effects None Increasedb NA None None None a No effect on overall rate; cesarean delivery for fetal distress significantly increased Increased mild and moderate umbilical cord compression patterns NA = not assessed b with oxytocin augmentation for arrested active-phase labor shortened the time to delivery by 44 minutes compared with that of oxytocin alone Although amniotomy did not alter the delivery route, one drawback was that it significantly increased the incidence of chorioamnionitis The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2013a) recommends the use of amniotomy to enhance progress in active labor, but cautions that this may increase the risks of infection and maternal fever ■ Membrane Stripping for Labor Induction Labor induction by membrane “stripping” is a frequent practice Several studies have suggested that membrane stripping is safe and decreases the incidence of postterm pregnancy without consistently increasing the incidence of ruptured membranes, infection, or bleeding Authors of a metaanalysis of 22 trials including 2797 women reported that membrane stripping reduced the number of women remaining undelivered after 41 weeks without increasing the infection risk They concluded that eight women would need to undergo membrane stripping to avoid one labor induction Downsides are discomfort and associated bleeding (Boulvain, 2005) ACTIVE MANAGEMENT OF LABOR This term describes a codified approach to the management of labor, which is discussed in detail in Chapter 22 (p 452) REFERENCES Alexander JM, Sharma SK, McIntire D, et al: Epidural analgesia lengthens the Friedman active phase of labor Obstet Gynecol 100:46, 2002 Alfirevic Z, Kelly AJ, Dowswell T: Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4:CD003246, 2009 American Academy of Pediatrics and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Guidelines for Perinatal Care, 7th ed 2012 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Dystocia and augmentation of labor Practice Bulletin No 49, December 2003, Reaffirmed 2013a American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Induction of labor Practice Bulletin No 107, August 2009, Reaffirmed 2013b American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles Practice Bulletin No 106, July 2009, Reaffirmed 2013c American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery Practice Bulletin 115, August 2010, Reaffirmed 2013d Arulkumaran S, Koh CH, Ingemarsson I, et al: Augmentation of labour— mode of delivery related to cervimetric progress Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol 27:304, 1987 Bakos O, Bäckström T: Induction of labor: a prospective, randomized study into amniotomy and oxytocin as induction methods in a total unselected population Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 66:537, 1987 Bailit JL, Gregory KD, Reddy UM, et al: Maternal and neonatal outcomes by labor onset type and gestational age Am J Obstet Gynecol 202(3):245 e1, 2010 Bateman BT, Mhyre JM, Callaghan WM, et al: Peripartum hysterectomy in the United States: nationwide 14 year experience Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(1):63.e1, 2012 Bishop EH: Pelvic scoring for elective induction Obstet Gynecol 24:266, 1964 Bleich AT, Villano KS, Lo JY, et al: Oral misoprostol for labor augmentation: a randomized controlled trial Obstet Gynecol 118(6):1255, 2011 Boulvain M, Kelly A, Irion O: Intracervical prostaglandins for induction of labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD006971, 2008 Boulvain M, Stan C, Irion O: Membrane sweeping for induction of labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD000451, 2005 Boyle A, Reddy UM, Landy HJ, et al: Primary cesarean delivery in the United States Obstet Gynecol 122(1):33, 2013 Bullarbo M, Orrskog ME, Andersch B, et al: Outpatient vaginal administration of the nitric oxide donor isosorbide mononitrate for cervical ripening and labor induction postterm: a randomized controlled study Am J Obstet Gynecol 196:50.e1, 2007 Caldeyro-Barcia R, Alvarez H, Reynolds SRM: A better understanding of uterine contractility through simultaneous recording with an internal and a seven channel external method Surg Obstet Gynecol 91:641, 1950 Caldeyro-Barcia R, Poseiro JJ: Physiology of the uterine contraction Clin Obstet Gynecol 3:386, 1960 Chanrachakul B, Herabutya Y, Punyavachira P: Potential efficacy of nitric oxide for cervical ripening in pregnancy at term Int J Gynaecol Obstet 71(3):217, 2000a Chanrachakul B, Herabutya Y, Punyavachira P: Randomized comparison of glyceryl trinitrate and prostaglandin E2 for cervical ripening at term Obstet Gynecol 96:549, 2000b Chiossi G, Lai Y, Landon MB, et al: Timing of delivery and adverse outcomes in term singleton repeat cesarean deliveries Obstet Gynecol 121(3):561, 2013 Clark SL, Miller DD, Belfort MA, et al: Neonatal and maternal outcomes associated with elective term delivery Am J Obstet Gynecol 200(2):156.e1, 2009 Collingham J, Fuh K, Caughey A, et al: Oral misoprostol and vaginal isosorbide mononitrate for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial Obstet Gynecol 116(1):121, 2010 Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Uccella S, et al: A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter Am J Obstet Gynecol 207(2):125.e1, 2012 Cullen M: Important drug warning concerning unapproved use of intravaginal or oral misoprostol in pregnant women for induction of labor or abortion August 23, 2000 Available at: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/00/Nov00/111500/cp0001.pdf Accessed September 14, 2013 du Vigneaud V, Ressler C, Swan JM, et al: The synthesis of oxytocin J Am Chem Soc 75:4879, 1953 Ekerhovd E, Bullarbo M, Andersch B, et al: Vaginal administration of the nitric oxide donor isosorbide mononitrate for cervical ripening at term: a randomized controlled study Am J Obstet Gynecol 189:1692, 2003 Induction and Augmentation of Labor Laughon SK, Zhang J, Grewal J, et al: Induction of labor in a contemporary obstetric cohort Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(6):486.e1, 2012b Laughon SK, Zhang J, Troendle J, et al: Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery Obstet Gynecol 117(4):805, 2011 Ledingham MA, Thomson AJ, Lunan CB, et al: A comparison of isosorbide mononitrate, misoprostol and combination therapy for first trimester pre-operative cervical ripening: a randomised controlled trial Br J Obstet Gynecol 108:276, 2001 Lichtenberg ES: Complications of osmotic dilators Obstet Gynecol Surv 59(7):528, 2004 Lin MG, Nuthalapaty FS, Carver AR, et al: Misoprostol for labor induction in women with term premature rupture of membranes: a meta-analysis Obstet Gynecol 106:593, 2005 Lo JY, Alexander JM, McIntire DD, et al: Ruptured membranes at term: randomized, double-blind trial of oral misoprostol for labor induction Obstet Gynecol 101:685, 2003 López-Zeno JA, Peaceman AM, Adashek JA, et al: A controlled trial of a program for the active management of labor N Engl J Med 326:450, 1992 Luthy DA, Malmgren JA, Zingheim RW: Cesarean delivery after elective induction in nulliparous women: the physician effect Am J Obstet Gynecol 191:1511, 2004 Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, et al: Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery N Engl J Med 345(1):3, 2001 Macones GA: Elective induction of labor: waking the sleeping dogma? Ann Intern Med 151(4):281, 2009 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, et al: Births: final data for 2011 Natl Vital Stat Rep 62(1), 1, 2013 Maslow AS, Sweeny AL: Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term Obstet Gynecol 95:917, 2000 Mei-Dan E, Walfisch A, Valencia C, et al: Making cervical ripening EASI: a prospective controlled comparison of single versus double balloon catheters J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med January 8, 2014 [Epub ahead of print] Mercer BM: Induction of labor in the nulliparous gravida with an unfavorable cervix Obstet Gynecol 105:688, 2005 Mercer BM, McNanley T, O’Brien JM, et al: Early versus late amniotomy for labor induction: a randomized trial Am J Obstet Gynecol 173:1371, 1995 Merrill DC, Zlatnik FJ: Randomized, double-masked comparison of oxytocin dosage in induction and augmentation of labor Obstet Gynecol 94:455, 1999 Mori R, Tokumasu H, Pledge D, et al: High dose versus low dose oxytocin for augmentation of delayed labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD007201, 2011 Murthy K, Grobman WA, Lee TA, et al: Trends in induction of labor at earlyterm gestation Am J Obstet Gynecol 204(5):435.e1, 2011 O’Driscoll K, Foley M, MacDonald D: Active management of labor as an alternative to cesarean section for dystocia Obstet Gynecol 63:485, 1984 Oshiro BT, Kowalewski L, Sappenfield W, et al: A multistate quality improvement program to decrease elective deliveries before 39 weeks of gestation Obstet Gynecol 121(5):1025, 2013 Osman I, MacKenzie F, Norrie J, et al: The “PRIM” study: a randomized comparison of prostaglandin E2 gel with the nitric oxide donor isosorbide mononitrate for cervical ripening before the induction of labor at term Am J Obstet Gynecol 194:1012, 2006 Osmundson S, Ou-Yang RJ, Grobman WA: Elective induction compared with expectant management in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix Obstet Gynecol 117(3):583, 2011 Osmundson SS, Ou-Yang RJ, Grobman WA: Elective induction compared with expectant management in nulliparous women with a favorable cervix Obstet Gynecol 116(3):601, 2010 Peregrine E, O’Brien P, Omar R, et al: Clinical and ultrasound parameters to predict the risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor Obstet Gynecol 107(2 Pt 1):227, 2006 Pevzner L, Rayburn WF, Rumney P, et al: Factors predicting successful labor induction with dinoprostone and misoprostol vaginal inserts Obstet Gynecol 114(2 Pt 1):261, 2009 Rouse DJ, McCullough C, Wren AL, et al: Active-phase labor arrest: a randomized trial of chorioamnion management Obstet Gynecol 83:937, 1994 Rouse DJ, Owen J, Hauth JC: Active-phase labor arrest: oxytocin augmentation for at least hours Obstet Gynecol 93:323, 1999 Rouse DJ, Owen J, Hauth JC: Criteria for failed labor induction: prospective evaluation of a standardized protocol Obstet Gynecol 96:671, 2000 Rouse DJ, Owen J, Savage KG, et al: Active phase labor arrest: revisiting the 2-hour minimum Obstet Gynecol 98:550, 2001 Satin AJ, Leveno KJ, Sherman ML, et al: High- versus low-dose oxytocin for labor stimulation Obstet Gynecol 80:111, 1992 Satin AJ, Leveno KJ, Sherman ML, et al: High-dose oxytocin: 20- versus 40-minute dosage interval Obstet Gynecol 83:234, 1994 CHAPTER 26 Ekerhovd E, Weijdegärd B, Brännström I, et al: Nitric oxide induced cervical ripening in the human: involvement of cyclic guanosine monophosphate, prostaglandin F2α, and prostaglandin E2 Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:745, 2002 Fisch JM, English D, Pedaline S, et al: Labor induction process improvement: a patient quality-of-care initiative Obstet Gynecol 113(4):797, 2009 Flannelly GM, Turner MJ, Rassmussen MJ, et al: Rupture of the uterus in Dublin: an update J Obstet Gynaecol 13:440, 1993 Fraser W, Marcoux S, Moutquin JM, et al: Effect of early amniotomy on the risk of dystocia in nulliparous women N Engl J Med 328:1145, 1993 Friedman EA: Primigravid labor: a graphicostatistical analysis Obstet Gynecol 6:567, 1955 Frigoletto FD, Lieberman E, Lang JM, et al: A clinical trial of active management of labor N Engl J Med 333:745, 1995 Garite TJ, Porto M, Carlson NJ, et al: The influence of elective amniotomy on fetal heart rate patterns and the course of labor in term patients: a randomized study Am J Obstet Gynecol 168:1827, 1993 Hamar B, Mann S, Greenberg P, et al: Low-risk inductions of labor and cesarean delivery for nulliparous and parous women at term Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:S215, 2001 Hatfield AS, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM: Sonographic cervical assessment to predict the success of labor induction: a systematic review with metaanalysis Am J Obstet Gynecol 197:186, 2007 Hauth JC, Hankins GD, Gilstrap LC III: Uterine contraction pressures achieved in parturients with active phase arrest Obstet Gynecol 78:344, 1991 Hauth JC, Hankins GD, Gilstrap LC III: Uterine contraction pressures with oxytocin induction/augmentation Obstet Gynecol 68:305, 1986 Hawkins JS, Wing DA: Current pharmacotherapy options for labor induction Expert Opin Pharmacother 13(14):2005, 2012 Heinemann J, Gillen G, Sanchez-Ramos L, et al: Do mechanical methods of cervical ripening increase infectious morbidity? A systematic review Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(2):177, 2008 Hernandez JS, Wendel GD Jr, Sheffield JS: Trends in emergency peripartum hysterectomy at a single institution: 1988–2009 Am J Perinatol 30(5):365, 2013 Ho M, Cheng SY, Li TC: Titrated oral misoprostol solution compared with intravenous oxytocin for labor augmentation: a randomized controlled trial Obstet Gynecol 116(3):612, 2010 Hoffman MK, Sciscione AC: Elective induction with cervical ripening increases the risk of cesarean delivery in multiparous women Obstet Gynecol 101:7S, 2003 Hofmeyr GJ, Gülmezoglu AM, Pileggi C: Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:CD000941, 2010 Jozwiak M, Bloemenkamp KW, Kelly AJ, et al: Mechanical methods for induction of labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD001233, 2012 Jozwiak M, Oude Rengerink K, Benthem M, et al: Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term (PROBAAT trial): an open-label, randomised controlled trial Lancet 378(9809):2095, 2011 Jozwiak M, Oude Rengerink K, Ten Eikelder ML, et al: Foley catheter or prostaglandin E2 inserts for induction of labour at term: an open-label randomized controlled trial (PROBAAT-P trial) and systematic review of literature Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 170(1):137, 2013a Jozwiak M, Ten Eikelder M, Rengerink KO, et al: Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol: randomized controlled trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and systematic review and meta-analysis of literature Am J Perinatol 31:145, 2014 Karjane NW, Brock EL, Walsh SW: Induction of labor using a Foley balloon, with and without extra-amniotic saline infusion Obstet Gynecol 107:234, 2006 Kelly AJ, Alfirevic Z, Dowswell T: Outpatient versus inpatient induction of labour for improving birth outcomes Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2: CD007372, 2009 Kelly AJ, Munson C, Minden L: Nitric oxide donors for cervical ripening and induction of labour Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD006901, 2011 Kominiarek MA, Zhang J, Vanveldhuisen P, et al: Contemporary labor patterns: the impact of maternal body mass index Am J Obstet Gynecol 205(3):244.e1, 2011 Kundodyiwa TW, Alfirevic Z, Weeks AD: Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labor: a systematic review Obstet Gynecol 113(2 Pt 1):374, 2009 Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, et al: Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery N Engl J Med 351(25):2581, 2004 Laughon SK, Branch DW, Beaver J, et al: Changes in labor patterns over 50 years Am J Obstet Gynecol 206(5):419.e1, 2012a 533 534 Labor SECTION Seitchik J, Amico J, Robinson AG, et al: Oxytocin augmentation of dysfunctional labor IV Oxytocin pharmacokinetics Am J Obstet Gynecol 150:225, 1984 Shellhaas CS, Gilbert S, Landon MB, et al: The frequency and complication rates of hysterectomy accompanying cesarean delivery Obstet Gynecol 114(2 Pt 1):224, 2009 Shin KS, Brubaker KL, Ackerson LM: Risk of cesarean delivery in nulliparous women at greater than 41 weeks’ gestational age with an unengaged vertex Am J Obstet Gynecol 190:129, 2004 Simon CE, Grobman WA: When has an induction failed? Obstet Gynecol 105: 705, 2005 Smith KM, Hoffman MK, Sciscione A: Elective induction of labor in nulliparous women increases the risk of cesarean delivery Obstet Gynecol 101:45S, 2003 Solheim K, Myers D, Sparks T, et al: Continuing a trial of labor after hours of active-phase labor arrest: a cost-effectiveness analysis Abstract No 205 Presented at the 29th Annual Meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine 26–31 January 2009 Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom KD, et al: Preventing the first cesarean delivery Summary of a Joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Workshop Obstet Gynecol 120(5):1181, 2012 Tanne JH: US hospitals are reducing early elective deliveries BMJ 346:f1417, 2013 Tita AT, Landon MB, Spong CY, et al: Timing of elective repeat cesarean delivery at term and neonatal outcomes N Engl J Med 360(2):111, 2009 Towers CV, Briggs GG, Rojas JA: The use of prostaglandin E2 in pregnant patients with asthma Am J Obstet Gynecol 190(6):1777, 2004 UK Amniotomy Group: A multicentre randomised trial of amniotomy in spontaneous first labour at term Br J Obstet Gynaecol 101:307, 1994 Uzun I, Sik A, Sevket O, et al: Bishop score versus ultrasound of the cervix before induction of labor for prolonged pregnancy: which one is better for prediction of cesarean delivery J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 26(14):1450, 2013 Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, et al: Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas Obstet Gynecol 105: 698, 2005 Väisänen-Tommiska M, Nuutila M, Aittomäki K, et al: Nitric oxide metabolites in cervical fluid during pregnancy: further evidence for the role of cervical nitric oxide in cervical ripening Am J Obstet Gynecol 188:779, 2003 Väisänen-Tommiska M, Nuutila M, Ylikorkala O: Cervical nitric oxide release in women postterm Obstet Gynecol 103:657, 2004 Villano KS, Lo JY, Alexander JM: A dose-finding study of oral misoprostol for labor augmentation Am J Obstet Gynecol 204(6):560.e1, 2011 Vrouenraets FPJM, Roumen FJME, Dehing CJG, et al: Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women Am J Obstet Gynecol 105: 690, 2005 Wagner M: Off-label use of misoprostol in obstetrics: a cautionary tale BJOG 112: 266, 2005 Wang W, Zheng J, Fu J, et al: Which is the safer method of labor induction for oligohydramnios women? Transcervical double balloon catheter or dinoprostone vaginal insert J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med January 8, 2014 [Epub ahead of print] Weeks AD, Fiala C, Safar P: Misoprostol and the debate over off-label drug use BJOG 112: 269, 2005 Wen T, Beceir A, Xenakis E, et al: Is there a maximum effective dose of Pitocin? Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:S212, 2001 Wing DA, Brown R, Plante LA, et al: Misoprostol vaginal insert and time to vaginal delivery A randomized controlled trial Obstet Gynecol 122(2 pt 1): 201, 2013 Wölfler MM, Facchinetti F, Venturini P, et al: Induction of labor at term using isosorbide mononitrate simultaneously with dinoprostone compared to dinoprostone treatment alone: a randomized, controlled trial Am J Obstet Gynecol 195:1617, 2006 Xenakis EMJ, Langer O, Piper JM, et al: Low-dose versus high-dose oxytocin augmentation of labor—a randomized trial Am J Obstet Gynecol 173: 1874, 1995 Yeast JD, Jones A, Poskin M: Induction of labor and the relationship to cesarean delivery: a review of 7001 consecutive inductions Am J Obstet Gynecol 180:628, 1999 Zhang J, Landy HJ, Branch DW, et al: Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes Obstet Gynecol 116(6):1281, 2010a Zhang J, Troendle J, Mikolajczyk R, et al: The natural history of the normal first stage of labor Obstet Gynecol 115(4):705, 2010b Zhang J, Troendle J, Reddy UM, et al: Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States Am J Obstet Gynecol 203(4):326.e1, 2010c Zhang J, Troendle JF, Yancey MK: Reassessing the labor curve in nulliparous women Am J Obstet Gynecol 187:824, 2002 ... were judged preventable 40 30 20 40 + 10 –3 10 .7 33.2 11 .5 6.3 1. 2 14 .2 2 .1 50 35 12 .6 34 .1 8.3 5.0 1. 6 19 .2 0.7 60 30 –3 10 .2 12 .5 12 .3 25 –2 19 .6 17 .2 15 .7 70 20 –2 Embolism Hemorrhage Gestational... mortality 12 0 ■ Infant Deaths 10 0 80 60 19 25 19 35 19 45 19 55 19 65 19 75 Y Year 19 85 19 95 FIGURE 1- 1 Fertility rate: United States, 19 25–2009 (From Sutton, 2 011 .) 2005 2009 There were 6 .1 infant... of Obstetrics Maternal mortality rate per 10 0,000 births 10 0 12 10 75 CHAPTER Rate per 10 00 live births and fetal deaths 14 50 25 19 50 19 60 19 70 19 80 19 90 2000 19 90 19 95 2000 2005 2006 FIGURE 1- 2