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

OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to evaluate the preterm birth rate in a subsequent pregnancy in women who had undergone term induction with a Foley catheter in comparison to induction with prostaglandins. METHODS:This was a follow-up study of two large randomized controlled trials. In the original trials (PROBAAT-1 and PROBAAT-2), women with a term, singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation with an indication for labor induction were randomized to either a 30cc Foley catheter or prostaglandins (i.e. vaginal prostaglandin E2 in PROBAAT 1 and oral misoprostol in PROBAAT 2). The main outcome measures were preterm birth <37 weeks gestation and preterm birth <34 weeks gestation. Data were collected from hospital charts on subsequent pregnancies from hospitals participating in this follow-up study. RESULTS:14 hospitals agreed to participate in this follow-up study. Of the 1142 eligible women, 162 women (14%) were lost to follow-up. Of the 572 women randomized to a Foley catheter, 251 women had a subsequent pregnancy beyond 16 weeks gestation, versus 258 women of the 570 women who received prostaglandins. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. The overall preterm birth rate was 9/251 (3.6%) in the Foley catheter group versus 10/258 (3.9%) in the prostaglandin group (RR 0.93; 95%CI 0.38-2.24), with spontaneous preterm birth rates of 5/251 (2.0%) versus 5/258 (1.9%) respectively (RR 1.03, 95%CI 0.30-3.51). CONCLUSIONS:In women with a singleton term pregnancy, induction of labor with a 30cc Foley catheter is not associated with an increased risk of preterm birth in a subsequent pregnancy as compared to induction of labor with prostaglandins. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.M. D. T. de Vaan, D. Blel, K. W. M. Bloemenkamp, M. Jozwiak, M. L. G. ten Eikelder ... B. W. Mol ... et al

Liever inleiden dan afwachten bij aterme zwangerschapshypertensie en milde preeclampsie: HYPITAT-studie

OBJECTIVE: To investigate what would benefit women with mild full-term pregnancy-related hypertension most: induction of labour or expectant monitoring, from the perspective of clinical effectiveness, maternal quality of life, and costs. DESIGN: Randomised clinical trial. Trial registration number ISRCTN08132825. METHODS: We undertook a multicentre randomised controlled trial in 38 hospitals in the Netherlands between October 2005 and March 2008. We enrolled patients with a singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation at 36-41 weeks' gestation, who had gestational hypertension or mild preeclampsia. Participants were randomly allocated to receive either induction of labour or expectant monitoring. The primary outcome was a composite measure of poor maternal outcome, defined as maternal mortality, maternal morbidity (eclampsia, 'haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelets' (HELLP) syndrome, pulmonary oedema, thrombo-embolic disease and abruptio placentae), progression to severe hypertension or proteinuria, and major postpartum haemorrhage. Secondary outcomes were mode of delivery, neonatal outcome, maternal quality of life and costs. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: A total of 756 patients were allocated to receive induction of labour (n = 377 patients) or expectant monitoring (n = 379). No cases of maternal or neonatal death or eclampsia were recorded. Development of poor maternal outcome was significantly lower in the induction of labour group (117 women) than the expectant monitoring group (166 women) (31% versus 44%; relative risk 0.71 (95% CI: 0.59-0.86); p < 0.001). The caesarean section rate was lower among women in the induction of labour group (n = 54) compared to women in the expectant monitoring group (n = 72) (14% versus 19%; relative risk 0.75 (95% CI: 0.55-1.04)< p = 0.085). Neonatal outcomes and quality of life were comparable between both groups. Induction of labour is a cost saving strategy (difference euro 831). CONCLUSION: For women with full-term gestational hypertension and pre-eclampsia, induction of labour is associated with improved maternal outcome and lower costs, without the additional risk of a caesarean section being necessary

Phenotypic Variability Associated with a Large Recurrent 1q21.1 Microduplication in a Three-Generation Family

Item does not contain fulltextRecurrent copy number variants of the q21.1 region of chromosome 1 have been associated with variable clinical features, including developmental delay, mild to moderate intellectual disability, psychiatric and behavioral problems, congenital heart malformations, and craniofacial abnormalities. A subset of individuals is clinically unaffected. We describe a unique 3-generation family with a large recurrent 1q21.1 microduplication (BP2-BP4). Our observations underline the incomplete penetrance and phenotypic variability of this rearrangement. We also confirm the association with congenital heart malformations, chronic depression, and anxiety. Furthermore, we report a broader range of dysmorphic features. The extreme phenotypic heterogeneity observed in this family suggests that additional factors modify the clinical phenotype

[The recurrence of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation]

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: To assess the recurrence risk of late preterm hypertensive disease of pregnancy and to determine whether potential risk factors are predictive. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Our study cohort included 425 women with a pregnancy-related hypertensive disorder who had delivered between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation at three different academic and three tertiary care hospitals in the Netherlands during the 2000-2002 period. Data were collected from medical files and by telephone interviews with the women. An adverse outcome was defined as the recurrence of a hypertensive disorder during the subsequent pregnancy. We also designed a prediction model containing demographic and clinical factors predictive for an adverse outcome. RESULTS: Of the 425 women who met the inclusion criteria, 351 could be contacted, of whom 189 (54%) had had a subsequent pregnancy. Pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders had recurred in 96 (51%; 95% CI: 43-58) women. Seventeen women (9%; 95% CI: 5-14) had delivered again before the 37th week. Pre-existing hypertension and maternal age were the strongest predictors for recurrence. Women who had experienced a recurrence had a 9-fold chance of developing chronic hypertension (37 vs. 6%; OR 8.7; 95% CI: 3.3-23). CONCLUSION: Women with hypertensive disorders and late preterm deliveries have a 50% chance of recurrence of the disorder and a 9% chance of recurrent premature delivery. Women with pre-existing hypertension or who are older are prone to recurrence. Women with a recurrent hypertensive disorder during a subsequent pregnancy often later develop chronic hypertension

Pharmacokinetics of nifedipine slow-release during sustained tocolysis

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: The pharmacokinetics of nifedipine as a tocolytic agent has not been studied in great detail in pregnant women and has instead focused on immediate release tablets and gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) tablets. The aim of this study was to determine nifedipine slowrelease half-life and distribution volume in pregnant women and to compare these with pharmacokinetic parameters of nifedipine in non-pregnant subjects described in the literature. MATERIALS: This is a study parallel to a trial studying women with threatened preterm labor between 26 + 0 and 32 + 2 weeks after initial tocolysis and a completed course of corticosteroids, who were randomly allocated to maintenance nifedipine (slow-release tablets 20 mg 4 times daily) or placebo. Exclusion criteria for the pharmacokinetic study were contra-indications for nifedipine, impaired liver function, and concomitant intake of inhibitors or inducers of the cytochrome P450 3A4 isoenzyme. Blood samples for measuring nifedipine plasma concentrations were drawn at t = 0, t = 12 hours, t = 24 hours, t = 48 hours, t = 72 hours, t = 7 days, and t = 9 days. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using iterative two-stage Bayesian population pharmacokinetic analysis by MWPharm(c) software. The study was designed to establish a correlation between body weight and nifedipine plasma level. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetic parameters of nifedipine slow-release tablets were determined from the data of 8 pregnant women. Nifedipine slow-release had a half-life of 2 - 5 hours, a mean distribution volume of 6.2 +/- 1.9 L/kg (calculated while using a fixed biological availability of 0.45 taken from the literature due to lack of intravenous data in this population) compared to a half-life of 6 - 11 hours, and a distribution volume of 1.2 - 1.3 L/kg described in non-pregnant subjects in the literature. None of the women delivered during study medication. Study medication was continued for the duration of the pharmacokinetic study (9 days) in all women. A correlation between nifedipine plasma levels and maternal body weight was not demonstrated. This may have been caused by lack of power. CONCLUSION: Pregnant subjects in this study, using nifedipine slow-release tablets, showed a larger volume of distribution and a shorter elimination half-life than for non-pregnant subjects as published in the literature

Pessary or Progesterone to Prevent Preterm delivery in women with short cervical length: the Quadruple P randomised controlled trial

Contains fulltext : 177872.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is in quantity and in severity the most important topic in obstetric care in the developed world. Progestogens and cervical pessaries have been studied as potential preventive treatments with conflicting results. So far, no study has compared both treatments. METHODS/DESIGN: The Quadruple P study aims to compare the efficacy of vaginal progesterone and cervical pessary in the prevention of adverse perinatal outcome associated with preterm birth in asymptomatic women with a short cervix, in singleton and multiple pregnancies separately. It is a nationwide open-label multicentre randomized clinical trial (RCT) with a superiority design and will be accompanied by an economic analysis. Pregnant women undergoing the routine anomaly scan will be offered cervical length measurement between 18 and 22 weeks in a singleton and at 16-22 weeks in a multiple pregnancy. Women with a short cervix, defined as less than, or equal to 35 mm in a singleton and less than 38 mm in a multiple pregnancy, will be invited to participate in the study. Eligible women will be randomly allocated to receive either progesterone or a cervical pessary. Following randomization, the silicone cervical pessary will be placed during vaginal examination or 200 mg progesterone capsules will be daily self-administered vaginally. Both interventions will be continued until 36 weeks gestation or until delivery, whichever comes first. Primary outcome will be composite adverse perinatal outcome of perinatal mortality and perinatal morbidity including bronchopulmonary dysplasia, intraventricular haemorrhage grade III and IV, periventricular leukomalacia higher than grade I, necrotizing enterocolitis higher than stage I, Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) or culture proven sepsis. These outcomes will be measured up until 10 weeks after the expected due date. Secondary outcomes will be, among others, time to delivery, preterm birth rate before 28, 32, 34 and 37 weeks, admission to neonatal intensive care unit, maternal morbidity, maternal admission days for threatened preterm labour and costs. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence on whether vaginal progesterone or a cervical pessary is more effective in decreasing adverse perinatal outcome in both singletons and multiples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: NTR 4414 . Date of registration January 29th 2014

[Foley catheter versus prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term: the PROBAAT study]

Objective To study the effectiveness and safety of induction of labour with a Foley catheter compared with vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel in full term pregnant women. Design Multicentre, randomised, open-label trial in 12 hospitals in the Netherlands between February 2009 and May 2010. Methods Women scheduled for induction of labour at full term singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation, intact membranes, and an unripe cervix (Bishop score < 6) were enrolled by means of an on-line system. Participants were randomly allocated to induction of labour with a transcervical Foley catheter or vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel. The primary outcome was caesarean section rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time from induction to birth. Results A total of 824 women were allocated to induction of labour with a Foley catheter (n = 412) or prostaglandin E2 (n = 412). Caesarean section rates were comparable (23% versus 20%, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.47). In the Foley catheter group fewer instrumental deliveries for foetal distress were performed (12% versus 18%, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.95). Time to delivery (median hours (IQR)) was longer (29 (15-35) versus 18 (12-33)). Fewer mothers had suspected intrapartum infection (2% versus 4%, RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.98). Significantly fewer neonates were admitted toaneonatal ward after induction with a Foley catheter (12% versus 20%, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.83). Conclusion In women with an unripe cervix at term, induction of labour with a Foley catheter does not reduce caesarean section rates, but there are fewer side-effects

[Foley catheter versus prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term: the PROBAAT study]

Item does not contain fulltextObjective To study the effectiveness and safety of induction of labour with a Foley catheter compared with vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel in full term pregnant women. Design Multicentre, randomised, open-label trial in 12 hospitals in the Netherlands between February 2009 and May 2010. Methods Women scheduled for induction of labour at full term singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation, intact membranes, and an unripe cervix (Bishop score < 6) were enrolled by means of an on-line system. Participants were randomly allocated to induction of labour with a transcervical Foley catheter or vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel. The primary outcome was caesarean section rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time from induction to birth. Results A total of 824 women were allocated to induction of labour with a Foley catheter (n = 412) or prostaglandin E2 (n = 412). Caesarean section rates were comparable (23% versus 20%, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.47). In the Foley catheter group fewer instrumental deliveries for foetal distress were performed (12% versus 18%, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.95). Time to delivery (median hours (IQR)) was longer (29 (15-35) versus 18 (12-33)). Fewer mothers had suspected intrapartum infection (2% versus 4%, RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.98). Significantly fewer neonates were admitted toaneonatal ward after induction with a Foley catheter (12% versus 20%, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.83). Conclusion In women with an unripe cervix at term, induction of labour with a Foley catheter does not reduce caesarean section rates, but there are fewer side-effects

Nifedipine versus atosiban for threatened preterm birth (APOSTEL III): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: In women with threatened preterm birth, delay of delivery by 48 h allows antenatal corticosteroids to improve neonatal outcomes. For this reason, tocolytics are often administered for 48 h; however, there is no consensus about which drug results in the best maternal and neonatal outcomes. In the APOSTEL III trial we aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of the calcium-channel blocker nifedipine and the oxytocin inhibitor atosiban in women with threatened preterm birth. METHODS: We did this multicentre, randomised controlled trial in ten tertiary and nine teaching hospitals in the Netherlands and Belgium. Women with threatened preterm birth (gestational age 25-34 weeks) were randomly assigned (1:1) to either oral nifedipine or intravenous atosiban for 48 h. An independent data manager used a web-based computerised programme to randomly assign women in permuted block sizes of four, with groups stratified by centre. Clinicians, outcome assessors, and women were not masked to treatment group. The primary outcome was a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes, which included perinatal mortality, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, sepsis, intraventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leukomalacia, and necrotising enterocolitis. Analysis was done in all women and babies with follow-up data. The study is registered at the Dutch Clinical Trial Registry, number NTR2947. FINDINGS: Between July 6, 2011, and July 7, 2014, we randomly assigned 254 women to nifedipine and 256 to atosiban. Primary outcome data were available for 248 women and 297 babies in the nifedipine group and 255 women and 294 babies in the atosiban group. The primary outcome occurred in 42 babies (14%) in the nifedipine group and in 45 (15%) in the atosiban group (relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.61-1.37). 16 (5%) babies died in the nifedipine group and seven (2%) died in the atosiban group (RR 2.20, 95% CI 0.91-5.33); all deaths were deemed unlikely to be related to the study drug. Maternal adverse events did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: In women with threatened preterm birth, 48 h of tocolysis with nifedipine or atosiban results in similar perinatal outcomes. Future clinical research should focus on large placebo-controlled trials, powered for perinatal outcomes. FUNDING: ZonMw (the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development)

Pronation in der Sportschuhforschung

OBJECTIVE: To determine women's satisfaction with pain relief using patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil compared with epidural analgesia during labour. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled equivalence trial. SETTING: 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Women with an intermediate to high obstetric risk with an intention to deliver vaginally. To exclude a clinically relevant difference in satisfaction with pain relief of more than 10%, we needed to include 1136 women. Because of missing values for satisfaction this number was increased to 1400 before any analysis. We used multiple imputation to correct for missing data. INTERVENTION: Before the onset of active labour consenting women were randomised to a pain relief strategy with patient controlled remifentanil or epidural analgesia if they requested pain relief during labour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was satisfaction with pain relief, measured hourly on a visual analogue scale and expressed as area under the curve (AUC), thus providing a time weighted measure of total satisfaction with pain relief. A higher AUC represents higher satisfaction with pain relief. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity scores, mode of delivery, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Analysis was done by intention to treat. The study was defined as an equivalence study for the primary outcome. RESULTS: 1414 women were randomised, of whom 709 were allocated to patient controlled remifentanil and 705 to epidural analgesia. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Pain relief was ultimately used in 65% (447/687) in the remifentanil group and 52% (347/671) in the epidural analgesia group (relative risk 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.48). Cross over occurred in 7% (45/687) and 8% (51/671) of women, respectively. Of women primarily treated with remifentanil, 13% (53/402) converted to epidural analgesia, while in women primarily treated with epidural analgesia 1% (3/296) converted to remifentanil. The area under the curve for total satisfaction with pain relief was 30.9 in the remifentanil group versus 33.7 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -2.8, 95% confidence interval -6.9 to 1.3). For who actually received pain relief the area under the curve for satisfaction with pain relief after the start of pain relief was 25.6 in the remifentanil group versus 36.1 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -10.4, -13.9 to -7.0). The rate of caesarean section was 15% in both groups. Oxygen saturation was significantly lower (SpO2 <92%) in women who used remifentanil (relative risk 1.5, 1.4 to 1.7). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION: In women in labour, patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil is not equivalent to epidural analgesia with respect to scores on satisfaction with pain relief. Satisfaction with pain relief was significantly higher in women who were allocated to and received epidural analgesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2551