Delivery Outcomes after Term Induction of Labor in Small-for-Gestational Age Fetuses

Janine S. Rhoades, Roxane M. Rampersad, Methodius G. Tuuli, George A. MacOnes, Alison G. Cahill, Molly J. Stout

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective The objective of this study was to estimate the delivery outcomes after induction of labor (IOL) at term in patients with small-for-gestational age (SGA) fetuses. Study Design A secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of all term, singleton deliveries from 2010 to 2014. Patients who underwent an IOL for any indication were included. Delivery outcomes were compared between patients with and without SGA fetuses (defined as birth weight < 10th percentile for gestational age). Analysis was stratified by parity. Indication for cesarean was compared between the two groups for those who did not achieve vaginal delivery. Logistic regression was used to adjust for confounders. Results Of 3,787 patients who underwent an IOL, 644 patients had SGA fetuses and 3,143 were included in the non-SGA group. There was no significant difference in rate of successful vaginal delivery for patients with and without SGA fetuses (77.2 vs. 72.0% [adjusted odds ratio: 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.50]). Of the patients who were delivered by cesarean, women with SGA fetuses were more likely to undergo cesarean for nonreassuring fetal status and less likely for arrest disorders than women without an SGA fetus. Conclusion Term patients undergoing IOL with SGA fetuses are as likely to achieve a vaginal delivery as patients with non-SGA fetuses.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)544-549
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of perinatology
Volume34
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017

Keywords

  • fetal growth restriction
  • induction of labor
  • small-for-gestational age

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Delivery Outcomes after Term Induction of Labor in Small-for-Gestational Age Fetuses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this