Perinatal and maternal outcomes according to timing of induction of labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Bavita Jeer, Emily Haberfeld, Asma Khalil, Shakila Thangaratinam, John Allotey*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The risk of adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes increases with gestational age, and although induction of labour may reduce these risks, the optimal timing of induction remains unknown. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis, to determine the gestational age at which induction should be offered. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and Embase databases from inception to July 2022, to identify randomised trials comparing induction of labour at or beyond 37' weeks gestation with expectant management or delayed induction, and according to the gestational age at planned induction. We undertook random effects meta-analysis and pooled estimates as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed risk of bias of studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0. We included 44 trials (23,960 women and 22,191 offspring) from 1,839 citations in our meta-analysis. The odds of perinatal death (odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.81; 26 studies, 20,154 offspring), stillbirth (0.40, 0.16 to 0.98; 25 studies, 19,412 offspring), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (0.86, 0.78 to 0.96; 23 studies, 18,846 offspring), and caesarean section (0.90, 0.83 to 0.98; 40 studies, 23,616 women) were reduced in the induction of labour group compared to expectant management or delayed induction. The odds of admission to neonatal intensive care unit (0.82, 0.70 to 0.96; 6 studies, 9,316 offspring) were lower with induction of labour at 41 weeks compared to induction at or after 42 weeks' gestation, and the odds of caesarean section were reduced with labour induction at 39 weeks' compared to induction at or after 40 weeks' (0.83, 0.74 to 0.93; 8 studies, 7,677 women). There were no significant differences in pregnancy outcomes by method of induction of labour. Induction of labour compared to expectant management or delayed induction reduces the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, and the optimal timing may depend on the specific outcome of interest.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)175-182
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology
Volume288
Early online date4 Aug 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sept 2023

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2023 The Author(s)

Keywords

  • Infant, Newborn
  • Pregnancy
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Cesarean Section
  • Watchful Waiting
  • Labor, Obstetric
  • Pregnancy Outcome
  • Labor, Induced/methods

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Perinatal and maternal outcomes according to timing of induction of labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this