Induction of labour at 39 weeks versus expectant management in low-risk obese women: study protocol for a randomised controlled study

Lise Qvirin Krogh, Sidsel Boie, Tine Brink Henriksen, Jim Thornton, Jens Fuglsang, Julie Glavind, Lise Qvirin Krogh, Sidsel Boie, Tine Brink Henriksen, Jim Thornton, Jens Fuglsang, Julie Glavind

Abstract

Introduction: Obesity is associated with many pregnancy complications, including both fetal macrosomia and prolonged labour. As a result, there is often also an increased risk of caesarean section. In other settings, labour induction near to term reduces adverse outcomes such as stillbirth and birth injury, without causing more caesarean deliveries. It has been suggested that induction will reduce adverse events in this setting too, but there have been no trials and the effect on caesarean section is unknown. The objective of this study is to compare induction of labour in gestational week 39 with expectant management on the risk of caesarean section in women with body mass index ≥30 kg/m2.

Methods and analysis: An open label randomised controlled multicentre trial are conducted at Danish delivery departments with an in-house neonatal intensive care unit. Recruitment started October 2020. A total of 1900 women with a prepregnancy body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 are randomised in a 1:1 ratio to either labour induction at 39 weeks and 0 to 3 days of gestation or to expectant management; that is, waiting for spontaneous labour onset or induction if medically indicated. The primary outcome is caesarean section. Data will be analysed according to intention-to-treat.

Ethics and dissemination: The Central Denmark Region Committee on Biomedical Research Ethics approved the study. The study is conducted in accordance with the ethical principles outlined in the latest version of the 'Declaration of Helsinki' and the 'Guideline for Good Clinical Practice' related to experiments on humans. The trial findings will be disseminated to participants, clinicians, commissioning groups and via peer-reviewed publications.

Trial registration number: NCT04603859.

Keywords: Maternal medicine; NEONATOLOGY; OBSTETRICS.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Eligibility, enrolment, randomisation and assessment.

References

    1. WHO . Obesity and overweight, 2018.
    1. Marchi J, Berg M, Dencker A, et al. . Risks associated with obesity in pregnancy, for the mother and baby: a systematic review of reviews. Obes Rev 2015;16:621–38. 10.1111/obr.12288
    1. Danish Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology . Obesity and pregnancy; 2017.
    1. EURO-PERISTAT . European perinatal health report. Health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe in 2015. EURO-PERISTAT project. Available:
    1. Poston L, Caleyachetty R, Cnattingius S, et al. . Preconceptional and maternal obesity: epidemiology and health consequences. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4:1025–36. 10.1016/S2213-8587(16)30217-0
    1. Leonard SA, Carmichael SL, Main EK, et al. . Risk of severe maternal morbidity in relation to prepregnancy body mass index: roles of maternal co-morbidities and caesarean birth. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2020;34:460–8. 10.1111/ppe.12555
    1. Yao R, Schuh BL, Caughey AB. The risk of perinatal mortality with each week of expectant management in obese pregnancies. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2019;32:434–41. 10.1080/14767058.2017.1381903
    1. Ovesen P, Rasmussen S, Kesmodel U. Effect of prepregnancy maternal overweight and obesity on pregnancy outcome. Obstet Gynecol 2011;118:305–12. 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182245d49
    1. Smid MC, Vladutiu CJ, Dotters-Katz SK, et al. . Maternal obesity and major intraoperative complications during cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;216:614.e1–7. 10.1016/j.ajog.2017.02.011
    1. Smid MC, Kearney MS, Stamilio DM. Extreme obesity and Postcesarean wound complications in the Maternal-Fetal medicine unit cesarean registry. Am J Perinatol 2015;32:1336–41. 10.1055/s-0035-1564883
    1. Stamilio DM, Scifres CM. Extreme obesity and postcesarean maternal complications. Obstet Gynecol 2014;124:227–32. 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000384
    1. Hibbard JU, Gilbert S, Landon MB, et al. . Trial of labor or repeat cesarean delivery in women with morbid obesity and previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:125–33. 10.1097/01.AOG.0000223871.69852.31
    1. Lee VR, Darney BG, Snowden JM, et al. . Term elective induction of labour and perinatal outcomes in obese women: retrospective cohort study. BJOG 2016;123:271–8. 10.1111/1471-0528.13807
    1. Palatnik A, Kominiarek MA. Outcomes of elective induction of labor versus expectant management among obese women at ≥39 weeks. Am J Perinatol 2020;37:695–707. 10.1055/s-0039-1688471
    1. Gibbs Pickens CM, Kramer MR, Howards PP, et al. . Term elective induction of labor and pregnancy outcomes among obese women and their offspring. Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:12–22. 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002408
    1. Walker KF, Bugg GJ, Macpherson M, et al. . Randomized trial of labor induction in women 35 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 2016;374:813–22. 10.1056/NEJMoa1509117
    1. Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, et al. . Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. N Engl J Med 2018;379:513–23. 10.1056/NEJMoa1800566
    1. Denison FC, Aedla NR, Keag O, et al. . Care of women with obesity in pregnancy: Green-top guideline No. 72. BJOG 2019;126:e62–106. 10.1111/1471-0528.15386
    1. ACOG . Clinical guidance for integration of the findings of the ARRIVE trial: labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. practices Advisory. Available:
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. . Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009;42:377–81. 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
    1. Dencker A, Taft C, Bergqvist L, et al. . Childbirth experience questionnaire (CEQ): development and evaluation of a multidimensional instrument. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2010;10:81. 10.1186/1471-2393-10-81
    1. Bech P, Rasmussen NA, Olsen LR, et al. . The sensitivity and specificity of the major depression inventory, using the present state examination as the index of diagnostic validity. J Affect Disord 2001;66): :159–64. 10.1016/S0165-0327(00)00309-8
    1. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. development of the 10-item Edinburgh postnatal depression scale. Br J Psychiatry 1987;150: :782–6. 10.1192/bjp.150.6.782

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다