Induction of labor in women with a uterine scar

Abstract

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 PGE₂ (prostaglandin-E₂), 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 PGE₂, 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.

• Induction of labor
• misoprostol
• PGE2
• TOLAC
• uterine scar

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Marilyn Hedges, Academic Language Center, Leiden University, the Netherlands, for language editing.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interests.