METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted in Malaysia in 232 term multiparous women with balloon catheter-ripened cervixes (dilatation ≥3 cm), singleton fetus, cephalic presentation with intact membranes, and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing. They were randomized to immediate titrated intravenous oxytocin infusion and early amniotomy (116) or delayed amniotomy after 4 h of oxytocin (116). Primary outcome was intervention (oxytocin initiation)-to-delivery interval.

METHODS: A randomized trial was conducted from September 2020 to March 2021. A total of 140 term nulliparas (70 early amniotomy, 70 delayed amniotomy) with Foley catheter-ripened cervices (dilatation ≥3 cm achieved), singleton fetus, cephalic presentation with intact membranes, and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were recruited. Women were randomized to immediate titrated intravenous oxytocin infusion and early amniotomy or delayed amniotomy (after 4 h of oxytocin). The primary outcome was intervention (oxytocin)-to-delivery interval (h).

RESULTS: Intervention-to-delivery intervals (h) were mean ± standard deviation 9.0 ± 3.6 versus 10.6 ± 3.5 h (mean difference of 1.4 h) (P = 0.004) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively. Birth rates at 6 h after oxytocin infusion were 19 of 70 (27.1%) versus 8 of 70 (11.4%) (relative risk, 2.38 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-5.06]; number needed to treat: 7 [95% CI, 3.5-34.4]) (P = 0.03), cesarean delivery rates were 29 of 70 (41.4%) versus 33 of 70 (47.1%) (relative risk, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.61-1.28) (P = 0.50), and maternal satisfaction on birth process were a median of 7 (interquartile range, 7-8) versus 7 (interquartile range, 7-8) (P = 0.40) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively.

DESIGN: randomised controlled trial of nulliparous women with spontaneous labour at term.

SETTING: labour suite of a university teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

PARTICIPANTS: 240 women were included (120 randomised into two arms).

INTERVENTIONS: the randomisation sequence was generated using a computer randomisation program in two blocks: oxytocin infused early following amniotomy; and oxytocin infused 2 h after amniotomy.

MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: labour duration, mode of delivery, oxytocin dosage used, uterine hyperstimulation, postpartum haemorrhage, Apgar score and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit were recorded. No differences in vaginal delivery rate (62.9% vs 70.9%; p = 0.248) and second-stage labour were found between the early and delayed oxytocin infusion groups (21.2 ± 18.3 min vs 25.5 ± 19.9 min; p = 0.220). The mean interval from amniotomy to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter for the early group (5.8 ± 1.7 h vs 7.0 ± 1.9 h; p = 0.001), and more women in the early group delivered during/before the planned review at 4 h after amniotomy (53.6% vs 10.6%; p<0.001). Maximum oxytocin usage was lower in the early group (5.6 ± 4.4 mL/hour vs 6.8 ± 5.3 mL/hour; p = 0.104).

KEY CONCLUSIONS: early oxytocin augmentation following amniotomy could be employed in low-risk primigravida, given that it is associated with a shorter labour duration without jeopardising maternal or neonatal outcomes.

AIM: To investigate the stability of ergometrine and ergometrine-oxytocin injections in PPH kits under simulated clinical storage conditions and to determine the potency of ampoules quarantined from PPH kits on our obstetric unit.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ergometrine and ergometrine-oxytocin injection ampoules were stored exposed to and protected from light at 4°C and room temperature (25°C) for up to three months, and assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Stability was based on the time for the ergometrine or oxytocin concentration to fall to 90% of the original concentration (t90 ). The potency of quarantined discoloured ampoules also was determined.

RESULTS: Ergometrine was stable at both temperatures for >6 months, when stored protected from light in simulated clinical conditions. When exposed to light, ergometrine was stable for approximately 4 days at 25°C and 10 days at 4°C. Discoloured ergometrine and ergometrine-oxytocin injection ampoules were found to be <90% of the nominal concentration.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate regular (4-hourly prior to each oral misoprostol dose with amniotomy when feasible) compared with restricted (only if indicated) vaginal assessments during labor induction with oral misoprostol in term nulliparous women MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a randomized trial between November 2016 and September 2017 in a university hospital in Malaysia. Our oral misoprostol labor induction regimen comprised 50 μg of misoprostol administered 4 hourly for up to 3 doses in the first 24 hours. Participants assigned to regular assessment had vaginal examinations before each 4-hourly misoprostol dose with a view to amniotomy as soon as it was feasible. Participants in the restricted arm had vaginal examinations only if indicated. Primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with the birth process (using an 11-point visual numerical rating scale), induction to vaginal delivery interval, and vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours.

RESULTS: Data from 204 participants (101 regular, 103 restricted) were analyzed. The patient satisfaction score with the birth process was as follows (median [interquartile range]): 7 [6-9] vs 8 [6-10], P = .15. The interval of induction to vaginal delivery (mean ± standard deviation) was 24.3 ± 12.8 vs 31.1 ± 15.0 hours (P = .013). The vaginal delivery rate at 24 hours was 27.7% vs 20.4%; (relative risk [RR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-2.3; P = .14) for the regular vs restricted arms, respectively. The cesarean delivery rate was 50% vs 43% (RR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.5; P = .36). When assessed after delivery, participants' fidelity to their assigned vaginal examination schedule in a future labor induction was 45% vs 88% (RR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.4-0.7; P < .001), and they would recommend their assigned schedule to a friend (47% vs 87%; RR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7; P < .001) in the regular compared with the restricted arms, respectively.

METHODS: We did an individual participant data meta-analysis comparing balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening before labour induction. We systematically identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that completed data collection between March 19, 2019, and May 1, 2021, by searching the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and PubMed. Further trials done before March 19, 2019, were identified through a recent Cochrane review. Data relating to the combined use of the two methods were not included, only data from women with a viable, singleton pregnancy were analysed, and no exclusion was made based on parity or membrane status. We contacted authors of individuals trials and participant-level data were harmonised and recoded according to predefined definitions of variables. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROB2 tool. The primary outcomes were caesarean delivery, indication for caesarean delivery, a composite adverse perinatal outcome, and a composite adverse maternal outcome. We followed the intention-to-treat principle for the main analysis. The primary meta-analysis used two-stage random-effects models and the sensitivity analysis used one-stage mixed models. All models were adjusted for maternal age and parity. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020179924).

FINDINGS: Individual participant data were available from 12 studies with a total of 5460 participants. Balloon catheters, compared with vaginal prostaglandins, did not lead to a significantly different rate of caesarean delivery (12 trials, 5414 women; crude incidence 27·0%; adjusted OR [aOR] 1·09, 95% CI 0·95-1·24; I2=0%), caesarean delivery for failure to progress (11 trials, 4601 women; aOR 1·20, 95% CI 0·91-1·58; I2=39%), or caesarean delivery for fetal distress (10 trials, 4441 women; aOR 0·86, 95% CI 0·71-1·04; I2=0%). The composite adverse perinatal outcome was lower in women who were allocated to balloon catheters than in those allocated to vaginal prostaglandins (ten trials, 4452 neonates, crude incidence 13·6%; aOR 0·80, 95% CI 0·70-0·92; I2=0%). There was no significant difference in the composite adverse maternal outcome (ten trials, 4326 women, crude incidence 22·7%; aOR 1·02, 95% CI 0·89-1·18; I2=0%).

INTERPRETATION: In induction of labour, balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins have comparable caesarean delivery rates and maternal safety profiles, but balloon catheters lead to fewer adverse perinatal events.

METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 3980 singletons, term pregnancy, spontaneous labouring women between 2015 and 2019 comparing outcomes between those with cervical dilation of 4 versus 6 cm at diagnosis of the active phase of labour.

METHODS: This non-blinded, randomized clinical trial included 228 pregnant women at term with obstetric or medical indications for induction of labour. Women either took 50 µg misoprostol orally (two 25 µg tablets) or had one 25 µg tablet of misoprostol inserted in the posterior vaginal fornix. In each group, misoprostol administration was repeated every four hours in the same dose until regular uterine contractions were established or to a maximum of five doses. Time to delivery and outcome data for each group were compared.

RESULTS: Of the 228 women, eight (3.5%) were excluded from the analysis as they withdrew their consent after randomization. Mean induction-to-delivery interval was similar in both groups (21.22 hours in the oral group vs. 20.15 hours in the vaginal group; P = 0.58). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to the number of women who delivered within 24 hours or who required oxytocin augmentation of labour, the mode of delivery, and neonatal outcomes (P > 0.05). Uterine hyperstimulation occurred in two women who received misoprostol vaginally, but not in any of the women in the oral misoprostol group.

METHOD: TVS of the cervix was performed before term labor induction. Induction was considered successful if vaginal delivery was achieved within 24 hours; 231 women were available for final analysis.

RESULTS: Analysis of the receiver operator characteristics curve showed an optimal cut-off for cervical length of < or = 20 mm for successful induction. Following multivariate logistic regression analysis, a sonographic short cervix (AOR 5.6; p < 0.001) was an independent predictor of successful induction but not a favorable Bishop score (p = 0.47). Among multiparas with a short cervix, positive and negative predictive values for successful induction were 98% (95% CI 90-100%) and 21% (95% CI 13%-32%) and among nulliparas, predictive values were 69% (95% CI 53%-82%) and 77% (95% CI 64%-87%) respectively.

METHODS: Parous women with favorable cervixes after amniotomy for labor induction were randomized to immediate titrated oxytocin or placebo intravenous infusion in a double-blind noninferiority trial. After 4 hours, study infusions were stopped, the women were assessed, and open-label oxytocin was started if required. Maternal satisfaction with the birth process was assessed with a 10-point visual numerical rating scale (lower score, greater satisfaction).

STUDY DESIGN: Participants were randomized to intravenous bolus injection of 100mcg carbetocin or 10IU oxytocin after cesarean delivery of the baby. The primary outcome is any additional uterotonic which may be administered by the blinded provider for perceived inadequate uterine tone with or without hemorrhage in the first 24hours after delivery. Secondary outcomes include operating time, perioperative blood loss, change in hemoglobin and hematocrit levels, blood transfusion and reoperation for postpartum hemorrhage.

RESULTS: Additional uterotonic rates were 107/276 (38.8%) vs. 155/271 (57.2%) [RR 0.68 95% CI 0.57-0.81 p<0.001; NNTb 6 95% CI 3.8-9.8], mean operating time 45.9±16.0 vs. 44.5±13.1minutes p=0.26, mean blood loss 458±258 vs. 446±281ml p=0.6, severe postpartum hemorrhage (≥1000ml) rates 15/276 (5.4%) vs. 10/271 (3.7%) p=0.33 and blood transfusion rates 6/276 (2.2%) vs. 10/271 (3.7%); p=0.30 for carbetocin and oxytocin arms respectively. There was only one case of re-operation (oxytocin arm). In the cases that needed additional uterotonic 98% (257/262) was started intraoperatively and in 89% (234/262) the only additional uterotonic administered was an oxytocin infusion over 6hours.

METHODS: A double-blind, multicenter randomized clinical trial was undertaken in four teaching hospitals in the North of Iraq and Al-Azhar University Hospital in Egypt, from March 2016 to May 2019. Group I (274 women) received 400 μg misoprostol and group II (249 women) received 800 μg misoprostol. Data regarding the time of placental separation and amount of vaginal blood loss were analyzed and proportions were compared between groups using Chi-squared test. Mean values were compared using the Student's t-test. The Mann-Whitney test was used to determine the median of vaginal blood loss.

METHODS: : Nulliparas with uncomplicated PROM at term, a Bishop score less than or equal to 6, and who required labor induction were recruited for a double-blind randomized trial. Participants were randomly assigned to 3-mg dinoprostone pessary and oxytocin infusion or placebo and oxytocin infusion. A cardiotocogram was performed before induction and maintained to delivery. Dinoprostone pessary or placebo was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix. Oxytocin intravenous infusion was commenced at 2 milliunits/min and doubled every 30 minutes to a maximum of 32 milliunits/min. Oxytocin infusion rate was titrated to achieve four contractions every 10 minutes. Primary outcomes were vaginal delivery within 12 hours and maternal satisfaction with the birth process using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 (higher score, greater satisfaction).

RESULTS: : One hundred fourteen women were available for analysis. Vaginal delivery rates within 12 hours were 25 of 57 (43.9%) for concurrent treatment compared with 27/57 (47.4%) (relative risk 0.9, 95% confidence interval 0.6-1.4, P=.85) for oxytocin only; median VAS was 8 (interquartile range [IQR] 2) compared with 8 (IQR 2), P=.38. Uterine hyperstimulation was 14% compared with 5.3%, P=.20; overall vaginal delivery rates were 59.6% compared with 64.9%, P=.70; and induction to vaginal delivery interval 9.7 hours compared with 9.4 hours P=.75 for concurrent treatment compared with oxytocin, respectively. There was no significant difference for any other outcome.

CONCLUSION: : Concurrent vaginal dinoprostone and intravenous oxytocin for labor induction of term PROM did not expedite delivery or improve patient satisfaction.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: : Current Controlled Trials, www.controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN74376345

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Major electronic databases were searched for randomized-controlled trials comparing carbetocin with oxytocin. Only trials involving cesarean deliveries were included. Non-randomized trials, non-cesarean deliveries, studies which did not directly compare carbetocin to oxytocin and studies which did not analyze the intended outcomes were excluded. Outcomes analysed were postpartum hemorrhage, additional use of uterotonic and transfusion requirement.