Internal versus external tocodynamometry during induced or augmented labour

Background Uterine contractions can be registered by external tocodynamometry (ET) or, after rupture of the membranes, by internal tocodynamometry (IT). Monitoring of the frequency of contractions is important especially when intravenous oxytocin is used as excessive uterine activity (hyperstimulation or tachysystole) can cause fetal distress. During induction of labour as well as during augmentation with intravenous oxytocin, some clinicians choose to monitor frequency and strength of contractions with IT rather than with ET as an intrauterine pressure catheter measures intrauterine activity more accurately than an extra-abdominal tocodynamometry device. However, insertion of an intrauterine catheter has higher costs and also potential risks for mother and child. Objectives To assess the effectiveness of IT compared with using ET when intravenous oxytocin is used for induction or augmentation of labour. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (11 April 2012) and PubMed (1966 to 7 March 2012). Selection criteria We included all published randomised controlled trials with data from women in whom IT was compared with ET in induced or augmented labour with oxytocin. We excluded trials that employed quasi-randomised methods of treatment allocation. We found no unpublished or ongoing studies on this subject. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and independently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. Where necessary, we contacted study authors for additional information. Main results Three studies involving a total of 1945 women were included. Overall, risk of bias across the three trials was mixed. No serious complications were reported in the trials and no neonatal or maternal deaths occurred. The neonatal outcome was not statistically different between groups: Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.83 to 3.83; three studies, n = 1945); umbilical artery pH less than 7.15 (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.79; one study, n = 1456); umbilical artery pH less than 7.16 (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.92; one study, n = 239); admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.67; two studies, n = 489); and more than 48 hours hospitalisation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.20; one study, n = 1456). The pooled risk for instrumental delivery (including caesarean section, ventouse and forceps extraction) was not statistically significantly different (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.21; three studies, n = 1945). Hyperstimulation was reported in two studies (n = 489), but there was no statistically significant difference between groups (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.88). Authors' conclusions This review found no differences between the two types of monitoring (internal or external tocodynamometry) for any of the maternal or neonatal outcomes. Given that this review is based on three studies (N = 1945 women) of moderate quality, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of one form of tocodynamometry over another for women where intravenous oxytocin was administered for induction or augmentation of labou

Maintenance therapy with oxytocin antagonists for inhibiting preterm birth after threatened preterm labour (Review)

Background: In some women, an episode of preterm labour settles and does not result in immediate preterm birth. Subsequent treatment with tocolytic agents such as oxytocin receptor antagonists may then have the potential to prevent the recurrence of preterm labour, prolonging gestation, and preventing the adverse consequences of prematurity for the infant. Objectives: To assess the effects of maintenance therapy with oxytocin antagonists administered by any route after an episode of preterm labour in order to delay or prevent preterm birth. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2013), sought ongoing and unpublished trials by contacting experts in the field and searched the reference lists of relevant articles. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing oxytocin antagonists with any alternative tocolytic agent, placebo or no treatment, used for maintenance therapy after an episode of preterm labour. Data collection and analysis: We used the standard methods of The Cochrane Collaboration and the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. Two review authors independently undertook evaluation of methodological quality and extracted trial data. Main results: This review includes one trial of 513 women. When compared with placebo, atosiban did not reduce preterm birth before 37 weeks (risk ratio (RR) 0.89; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.71 to 1.12), 32 weeks (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.47 to 1.55), or 28 weeks (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.28 to 2.01). No difference was shown in neonatal morbidity, or perinatal mortality. Authors' conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to support the use of oxytocin receptor antagonists to inhibit preterm birth after a period of threatened or actual preterm labour. Any future trials using oxytocin antagonists or other drugs as maintenance therapy for preventing preterm birth should examine a variety of important infant outcome measures, including reduction of neonatal morbidity and mortality, and long-term infant follow-up. Future research should also focus on the pathophysiological pathways that precede preterm labour

Oxytocin receptor antagonists for inhibiting preterm labour (Review)

Backgroun

Induction of labor with Foley catheter and risk of subsequent preterm birth : follow‐up study of two randomized controlled trials (PROBAAT‐1 and ‐2)

Acknowledgements We thank all the women who participated in the PROBAAT trials and all participating institutions and their staff for their contribution to this follow-up study. Funding The original PROBAAT-2 trial was funded by FondsNutsOhra. For the PROBAAT-1 trial and this follow-up study, no funding was received. MV received a doctoral grant for teachers by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (023.011.051). BM is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). Funding sources had no role in design, execution, analyses, interpretation, or decision to submit results.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Assessment of perinatal outcome after sustained tocolysis in early labour (APOSTEL-II trial)

Contains fulltext : 80242.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Preterm labour is the main cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality in the Western world. At present, there is evidence that tocolysis for 48 hours is useful in women with threatened preterm labour at least before 32 weeks. This allows transfer of the patient to a perinatal centre, and maximizes the effect of corticosteroids for improved neonatal survival. It is questionable whether treatment with tocolytics should be maintained after 48 hours. METHODS/DESIGN: The APOSTEL II trial is a multicentre placebo-controlled study. Pregnant women admitted for threatened preterm labour who have been treated with 48 hours corticosteroids and tocolysis will be eligible to participate in the trial between 26+0 and 32+2 weeks gestational age. They will be randomly allocated to nifedipine (intervention) or placebo (control) for twelve days or until delivery, whatever comes first.Primary outcome is a composite of perinatal death, and severe neonatal morbidity up to evaluation at 6 months after birth. Secondary outcomes are gestational age at delivery, number of days in neonatal intensive care and total days of the first 6 months out of hospital. In addition a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. Analysis will be by intention to treat. The power calculation is based on an expected 11% difference in adverse neonatal outcome. This implies that 406 women have to be randomised (two sided test, beta 0.2 at alpha 0.05). DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence as to whether maintenance tocolysis reduces severe perinatal morbidity and mortality in women with threatened preterm labour before 32 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration: http://www.trialregister.nl, NTR 1336, date of registration: June 3rd 2008

Atosiban versus fenoterol as a uterine relaxant for external cephalic version: randomised controlled trial

Objective To compare the effectiveness of the oxytocin receptor antagonist atosiban with the beta mimetic fenoterol as uterine relaxants in women undergoing external cephalic version (ECV) for breech presentation. Design Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial. Setting Eight hospitals in the Netherlands, August 2009 to May 2014. Participants 830 women with a singleton fetus in breech presentation and a gestational age of more than 34 weeks were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either 6.75 mg atosiban (n=416) or 40 μg fenoterol (n=414) intravenously for uterine relaxation before ECV. Main outcome measures The primary outcome measures were a fetus in cephalic position 30 minutes after the procedure and cephalic presentation at delivery. Secondary outcome measures were mode of delivery, incidence of fetal and maternal complications, and drug related adverse events. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. Results Cephalic position 30 minutes after ECV occurred significantly less in the atosiban group than in the fenoterol group (34% v 40%, relative risk 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 0.93). Presentation at birth was cephalic in 35% (n=139) of the atosiban group and 40% (n=166) of the fenoterol group (0.86, 0.72 to 1.03), and caesarean delivery was performed in 60% (n=240) of women in the atosiban group and 55% (n=218) in the fenoterol group (1.09, 0.96 to 1.20). No significant differences were found in neonatal outcomes or drug related adverse events. Conclusions In women undergoing ECV for breech presentation, uterine relaxation with fenoterol increases the rate of cephalic presentation 30 minutes after the procedure. No statistically significant difference was found for cephalic presentation at delivery