Cervical ripening after cesarean section: a prospective dual center study comparing a mechanical osmotic dilator vs. prostaglandin E2
- PMID: 34333894
- DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2021-0157
Cervical ripening after cesarean section: a prospective dual center study comparing a mechanical osmotic dilator vs. prostaglandin E2
Abstract
Objectives: Worldwide, the overall cesarean section is rising. Trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) is an overall safe option with an immediate impact on neonatal and maternal short- and long-term health. Since the use of prostaglandins in cervical ripening is associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture, mechanical methods as balloon catheters or osmotic dilators have been suggested for cervical ripening prior to induction of labour. Here we are analyzing and comparing the VBAC rate, as well as maternal and fetal outcome in cervical ripening prior to TOLAC.
Methods: This prospective dual center study analyses maternal and neonatal outcomes of TOLAC in women with an unfavorable cervix requiring cervical ripening agent. The prospective application of an osmotic dilator (Dilapan-S, n=104) was analysed in comparison to the retrospective application of off-label dinoprostone (n=102).
Results: The overall fetal and neonatal outcome revealed no significant differences in both groups. Patients receiving cervical ripening with the osmotic dilator delivered vaginally/by ventouse in 52% of cases, compared to 53% when using dinoprostone (p=0.603). The interval between application to onset of labor was significantly higher in the osmotic dilator group (37.9 vs.20.7 h, p=<0.001). However, time from onset of labor to delivery was similar in both groups (7.93 vs. 7.44 h, p=0.758). There was one case of uterine rupture in the dinoprostone group.
Conclusions: Our data shows that the application of the osmotic dilator leads to similar outcomes in VBAC rate and time from onset of labor to delivery as well as safety in both groups compared to off-label use dinoprostone. Cervical ripening using the mechanical dilator is a viable and effective option, without the risk of uterine hyperstimulation.
Keywords: cervical ripening; cesarean section (CS); cesarean section rate; osmotic dilator; repeat cesarean section (RCS); trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC); unfavorable cervix; uterine scar; vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC).
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.
Similar articles
-
Induction of labor in patients with an unfavorable cervix after a cesarean using an osmotic dilator versus vaginal prostaglandin.J Perinat Med. 2018 Apr 25;46(3):299-307. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2017-0029. J Perinat Med. 2018. PMID: 28672756
-
Cervical ripening by prostaglandin E2 in patients with a previous cesarean section.J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2020 Apr;49(4):101699. doi: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101699. Epub 2020 Feb 1. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2020. PMID: 32018044
-
Cervical Osmotic Dilators versus Dinoprostone for Cervical Ripening during Labor Induction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 14 Controlled Trials.Am J Perinatol. 2024 May;41(S 01):e2034-e2046. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1770161. Epub 2023 Jun 19. Am J Perinatol. 2024. PMID: 37336231
-
MEchanical DIlatation of the Cervix-- in a Scarred uterus (MEDICS): the study protocol of a randomised controlled trial comparing a single cervical catheter balloon and prostaglandin PGE2 for cervical ripening and labour induction following caesarean delivery.BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 6;9(11):e028896. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-028896. BMJ Open. 2019. PMID: 31699720 Free PMC article.
-
Methods for the induction of labor: efficacy and safety.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Mar;230(3S):S669-S695. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.02.009. Epub 2023 Jul 13. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024. PMID: 38462252 Review.
Cited by
-
Synthetic Osmotic Dilators for Pre-Induction Cervical Ripening - an Evidence-Based Review.Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2023 Jul 7;83(12):1491-1499. doi: 10.1055/a-2103-8329. eCollection 2023 Dec. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2023. PMID: 38046527 Free PMC article.
-
The Effect of Preinduction Cervical Ripening With Synthetic Hygroscopic Dilators on Maternal Outcomes of Women With Previous Caesarean Pregnancy: A Single-Group Clinical Trial.J Pregnancy. 2024 Dec 19;2024:8835464. doi: 10.1155/jp/8835464. eCollection 2024. J Pregnancy. 2024. PMID: 39734326 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
A Review of the Mechanism of Action and Clinical Applications of Osmotic Dilators for Cervical Ripening in the Induction of Labor and in Gynecology Procedures.Med Sci Monit. 2023 Jun 27;29:e940127. doi: 10.12659/MSM.940127. Med Sci Monit. 2023. PMID: 37368878 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Mechanical Methods for the Induction of Labour After Previous Caesarean Section - An Updated, Evidence-based Review.Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2022 Mar 16;82(7):727-735. doi: 10.1055/a-1731-7441. eCollection 2022 Jul. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2022. PMID: 35815098 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Federal Statistical Office Germany: hospital deliveries in Germany. 2020.
-
- Health at a Glance 2019. OECD; 2019: 200–1 pp.
-
- Marshall, NE, Fu, R, Guise, J-M. Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011 Jun 15;205:262.e1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.06.035. [Epub ahead of print].
-
- Gregory, K, Jackson, S, Korst, L, Fridman, M. Cesarean versus vaginal delivery: whose risks? Whose benefits? Am J Perinatol 2012 Aug 10;29:7–18. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0031-1285829. [Epub ahead of print].
-
- Dodd, JM, Crowther, CA, Grivell, RM, Deussen, AR. Elective repeat caesarean section versus induction of labour for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;7. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd004906.pub5.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical