uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Induction of labor in women with a uterine scar
Karolinska Inst, Soder Hosp, Sect Obstet & Gynecol, Dept Clin Sci & Educ, S-11883 Stockholm, Sweden..
Karolinska Inst, Soder Hosp, Sect Obstet & Gynecol, Dept Clin Sci & Educ, S-11883 Stockholm, Sweden..
Karolinska Inst, Soder Hosp, Sect Obstet & Gynecol, Dept Clin Sci & Educ, S-11883 Stockholm, Sweden..
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
Show others and affiliations
2016 (English)In: The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, ISSN 1476-7058, E-ISSN 1476-4954, Vol. 29, no 20, 3286-3291 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: To evaluate the frequency of uterine rupture following induction of labor in women with a previous cesarean section. Misoprostol was compared to other methods of induction.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study of 208 women attempting induction of labor after one previous cesarean section. Delivery data were collected retrospectively and compared. Group 1(2009-2010) was compared with Group 2 (2012-2013). In Group 1, the main method of induction was vaginal PGE(2) (prostaglandin-E-2), amniotomy, oxytocin or a balloon catheter. In Group 2, the dominant method of induction was an oral solution of misoprostol. Main outcome measures: frequency of uterine rupture in the two groups.

Results: Nine cases (4.3%) of uterine rupture occurred. There was no significant difference in the frequency of uterine rupture following the change of method of induction from PGE(2), amniotomy, oxytocin or mechanical dilatation with a balloon catheter to orally administered misoprostol (4.1 versus 4.6%, p=0.9). All ruptures occurred in women with no prior vaginal delivery.

Conclusion: The shift to oral misoprostol as the primary method of induction in women with a previous cesarean section did not increase the frequency of uterine rupture in the cohort studied.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 29, no 20, 3286-3291 p.
Keyword [en]
Induction of labor, misoprostol, PGE2, TOLAC, uterine scar
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-302671DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1123242ISI: 000380130200010PubMedID: 26699657OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-302671DiVA: diva2:967456
Available from: 2016-09-08 Created: 2016-09-08 Last updated: 2016-09-08Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Åkerud, Helena
By organisation
Obstetrics and Gynaecology
In the same journal
The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 299 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf