Can uterocervical angle and cervical length determine the success of induction of labor in late-term and post-term nulliparous pregnant women?
Öz
Purpose: The aim og this study was to evaluate the role of uterocervical angle (UCA) and cervical length (CL) in predicting the success of induction of labor before induction was performed in late term and post-term pregnancies.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was carried out between January 2018 and April 2020, in Medipol University based on the data about 260 late-term and post-term nulliparous pregnant women who underwent induction of labor. UCA and CL values in pregnant women were assessed just before the induction was performed. Our study population was assigned into two groups: successful IoL group (group1) and failed (group 2) IoL group. The primary outcome of the study is the effectiveness of UCA and CL in predicting successful induction of labor (latent phase duration ≤720 min).
Results: While the mean UCA was 102.17 ± 4.26 degree in the successful labor induction group, it was 94.25 ± 7.141 degree in the unsuccessful group. While the mean CL was 27.85 ± 3.5 mm in the successful labor induction group, it was found as 31.73 ± 2.71 mm in the unsuccessful group. There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of mean values for the CL and UCA. Both the UCA and the CLsignificantly predicted the duration of the prolonged latent phase.
Conclusions: This study indicated that both the UCA and CL measurements had a significant predictive value in predicting successful induction of labor and normal birth in late term and post-term nulliparous pregnant women.
Proje Numarası
10840098-604.01.01-E.14177
Kaynakça
- 1.Management of Late-Term and Postterm Pregnancies. Practice Bulletin No 146. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet and Gynecol. 2014;124(2):390-396.
- 2. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Kirmeyer S, Mathews TJ, et al. Births: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2011;60(1):1–70.
- 3. Crane JM. Factors predicting labor induction success: a critical analysis. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2006;49(3):573–584.
- 4. Pevzner L, Rayburn WF, Rumney P, Wing DA. Factors predicting successful labor induction with dinoprostone and misoprostol vaginal inserts. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114(2):261–267.
- 5. Parkes I, Kabiri D, Hants Y, Ezra Y. The indication for induction of labor impacts the risk of cesarean delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;29(2):224–228.
- 6. Lazanakis M, Marsh M, Brockbank E, Economides D. Assessment of the cervix in the third trimester of pregnancy using transvaginal ultrasound scanning. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002;105(1):31–35.
- 7. Sochacki-Wójcicka N, Wojcicki J, Bomba-Opon D, Wielgos M. Anterior cervical angle as a new biophysical ultrasound marker for prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;46(3):377–378.
- 8. Dziadosz M, Bennett TA, Dolin C, West Honart A, Pham A, Lee SS, et al. Uterocervical angle: a novel ultrasound screening tool to predict spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;215(3):1-7. 9. Sepúlveda-Martínez A, Díaz F, Muñoz H, Valdés E, Parra-Cordero M. Second-trimester anterior cervical angle in a low-risk population as a marker for spontaneous preterm delivery. Fetal Diagn Ther 2017;41(3):220–225.
- 10. Eser A., Ozkaya E.Uterocervical angle: an ultrasound screening tool to predict satisfactory response to labor inductionJ Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;33(8):1295-1301.
- 11. Dagdeviren E, Aslan Çetin B, Aydogan Mathyk B, Koroglu N, Topcu EG, Yuksel MA. Can uterocervical angles successfully predict induction of labor in nulliparous women? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;228:87-91.
