Effectiveness of first trimester ultrasound screening in reduction of postdated labor induction rate
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20213659Keywords:
Antenatal women, First trimester dating scan, Postdated pregnancy, Induction of laborAbstract
Background: The gestational age calculation by ultrasonography (USG) at first trimester is based on crown-rump length is more accurate, less erratic than last menstrual period based dating. Utilization of first trimester based scanning in dating the pregnancy will reduce the labor induction rate and consequently reduce the morbidity related to induction of labor.
Methods: A comparative cross-sectional study was done among 314 booked antenatal women visiting department of obstetrics and gynecology, BPKIHS for regular check-up between 37 and 41 weeks of gestation. Expected date of delivery was calculated from crown rump length (CRL) of the first trimester scan for USG group while last menstrual period was taken to calculate expected date of delivery for LMP group and were called for induction at 41 weeks of gestation. The rates of labor induction, emergency cesarean section (CS) among induced group, indication of CS and mode of delivery were compared in both the groups.
Results: There was 14% labor induction rate in USG group and 24.2% in LMP (last menstrual period) group and differed significantly (p=0.022). There was no difference in the mode of delivery among participants in either groups. The rate of emergency CS among women undergoing induction of labor was 54.5% and 39.5% respectively for USG and LMP groups (p=0.258). Overall, non-reassuring fetal heart rate was the most common indication for CS in both the groups.
Conclusions: The finding suggests first trimester scan among all pregnancies will reduce the post-dated inductions, as well as need of CS.
References
Marconi AM. Recent advances in the induction of labor. F1000Res. 2019;8:1000.
Induction of labour. Evidence-based Clinical Guideline Number 9. Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2001.
ACOG practice bulletin no. 107: induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:386-97.
Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Matthews TJ. Births: Final data for 2013. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2015;64(1):1-65.
Spong CY. Defining “term” pregnancy: recommendations from the defining “term” pregnancy workgroup. JAMA. 2013;309(23):2445-6.
Hussain AA, Yakoob MY, Imdad A, Bhutta ZA. Elective induction for pregnancies at or beyond 41 weeks of gestation and its impact on stillbirths: a systematic review with meta-analysis. BMC Pub Health. 2011;11(3):5.
World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: induction of labour at or beyond term: World Health Organization; 2018. Available at: https://apps. who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/277233/9789241550413-eng.pdf. Accessed on 3 June 2021.
Doubilet PM. Should a first trimester dating scan be routine for all pregnancies? Semin Perinatol. 2013;37(5):307-9.
Butt K, Lim KI. Guideline no. 388-determination of gestational age by ultrasound. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2019;41(10):1497-507.
Butt K, Lim K, Bly S, Cargill Y, Davies G, Denis N, et al. Determination of gestational age by ultrasound. J Obstetr Gynaecol Canada. 2014;36(2):171-81.
Ohuma EO, Papageorghiou AT, Villar J, Altman DG. Estimation of gestational age in early pregnancy from crown-rump length when gestational age range is truncated: the case study of the INTERGROWTH-21 st Project. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):151.
Treger M, Hallak M, Silberstein T, Friger M, Katz M, Mazor M. Post-term pregnancy: should induction of labor be considered before 42 weeks? J Mat Fetal Neonat Med. 2002;11(1):50-3.
Galal M, Symonds I, Murray H, Petraglia F, Smith R. Postterm pregnancy. Facts View Vision Obgyn. 2012;4(3):175.
Alfirevic Z, Weeks A. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;2:001338.
Tuladhar H, Dhakal N. Impact of antenatal care on maternal and perinatal utcome: a study at Nepal medical college teaching hospital. Nepal J Obstetr Gynaecol. 2011;6(2):37-43.
Kozuki N, Katz J, Khatry SK, Tielsch JM, LeClerq SC, Mullany LC. Community survey on awareness and use of obstetric ultrasonography in rural Sarlahi District, Nepal. Int J Gynecol Obstetr. 2016;134(2):126-30.
Bennett K, Crane J, O’Shea P, Lacelle J, Hutchens D, Copel J. Combined first-and second-trimester ultrasound screening is effective in reducing postterm labor induction rates: a randomized, controlled trial. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2003;29(5):65.
Chalouhi G, Bernard J, Benoist G, Nasr B, Ville Y, Salomon LJ. A comparison of first trimester measurements for prediction of delivery date. J Mat Fetal Neonat Med. 2011;24(1):51-7.
Bennett KA, Crane JM, O'shea P, Lacelle J, Hutchens D, Copel JA. First trimester ultrasound screening is effective in reducing postterm labor induction rates: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstetr Gynecol. 2004;190(4):1077-81.
Harrington D, MacKenzie I, Thompson K, Fleminger M, Greenwood C. Does a first trimester dating scan using crown rump length measurement reduce the rate of induction of labour for prolonged pregnancy? An uncompleted randomised controlled trial of 463 women. BJOG Int J Obstetr Gynaecol. 2006;113(2):171-6.
Ewigman BG, Crane JP, Frigoletto FD, LeFevre ML, Bain RP, McNellis D, et al. Effect of prenatal ultrasound screening on perinatal outcome. New England J Med. 1993;329(12):821-7.
Thangarajah F, Scheufen P, Kirn V, Mallmann P. Induction of labour in late and postterm pregnancies and its impact on maternal and neonatal outcome. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde. 2016;76(07):793-8.
Ehrenthal DB, Jiang X, Strobino DM. Labor induction and the risk of a cesarean delivery among nulliparous women at term. Obstetr Gynecol. 2010;116(1):35-42.
Rossi RM, Requarth E, Warshak CR, Dufendach KR, Hall ES, DeFranco EA. Risk calculator to predict cesarean delivery among women undergoing induction of labor. Obstetr Gynecol. 2020;135(3):559-68.
