Induction of labour: clinical predictive factors for success and failure

References

• Alchalabi HA, Obeidat BR, Jallad MF, Khader YS. 2006. Induction of labor and perinatal outcome: the impact of the amniotic fluid index. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 129:124–127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bueno B, San-Frutos L, Perez-Medina T, Barbancho C, Troyano J, Bajo J. 2007. The labour induction: integrated clinical and sonographic variables that predict the outcome. Journal of Perinatology 27:4–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandra S, Crane JM, Hutchens D, Young DC. 2001. Transvaginal ultrasound and digital examination in predicting successful labour induction. Obstetrics & Gynecology 98:2–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chauhan SP, Sanderson M, Hendrix NW, Magann EF, Devoe LD. 1999. Perinatal outcome and amniotic fluid index in the antepartum and intrapartum periods: a meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 181:1473–1478.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crane JM. 2006. Factors predicting labor induction success: a critical analysis. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 49:573–584.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crane JM, Delaney T, Butt KD, Bennett KA, Hutchens D, Young DC. 2004. Predictors of successful labour induction with oral or vaginal misoprostol. Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 15:319–323.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dudley NJ. 2005. A systematic review of the ultrasound estimation of fetal weight. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology 25:80–89.
   Google Scholar
• Favilli A, Acanfora MM, Bini V, Radicchi R, Di Renzo GC, Gerli S. 2013. Single indication of labor induction with prostaglandins: is advanced maternal age a risk factor for cesarean section? A matched retrospective cohort study. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 26:665–668.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grobman WA, Simon C. 2007. Factors associated with the length of the latent phase during labor induction. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 132:163–166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolkman DG, Verhoeven CJ, Brinkhorst SJ, Van Der Post JA, Pajkrt E, Opmeer BC, et al. 2013. The bishop score as a predictor of labor induction success: a systematic review. American Journal of Perinatology 30:625–630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morris JM, Thompson K, Smithey J, Gaffney G, Cooke I, Chamberlain P, et al. 2003. The usefulness of ultrasound assessment of amniotic fluid in predicting adverse outcome in prolonged pregnancy: a prospective blinded observational study. BJOG 110:989–994.
   Google Scholar
• Nader R, Shek KL, Dietz HP. 2010. Predicting the outcome of induction of labour. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 50:329–333.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pescetto G, De Cecco L, Pecorari D, Ragni N. 2009a. Fisiologia del Parto e del Travaglio. In: Società Editrice Universo, editor. Ginecologia e ostetricia. 4th ed. Roma. p. 139–221.
   Google Scholar
• Pescetto G, De Cecco L, Pecorari D, Ragni N. 2009b. Lesioni vaginali, vulvari e perineali. In: Società Editrice Universo, editor. Ginecologia e ostetricia. 4th ed. Roma. p. 1106–1110.
   Google Scholar
• Pescetto G, De Cecco L, Pecorari D, Ragni N. 2009c. Outcome. In: Società Editrice Universo, editor. Ginecologia e ostetricia. 4th ed. Roma. p. 1223–1226.
   Google Scholar
• Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. 2003. Pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length in prolonged pregnancy: the effect of parity in the prediction of the need for Cesarean section. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology 22:45–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reis FM, Gervasi MT, Florio P, Bracalente G, Fadalti M, Severi FM, et al. 2003. Prediction of successful induction of labour at term: role of clinical history, digital examination, ultrasound assessment of the cervix, and fetal fibronectin assay. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 189:1361–1367.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riboni F, Garofalo G, Pascoli I, Vitulo A, Dell’Avanzo M, Battagliarin G, et al. 2012. Labour induction at term: clinical, biophysical and molecular predictive factors. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 286:1123–1129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roman H, Robillard PY, Verspyck E, Hulsey TC, Marpeau L, Barau G. 2004. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes in grand multiparity. Obstetrics and Gynecology 103:1294–1299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satin AJ, Leveno KJ, Sherman ML, Brewster DS, Cunningham FG. 1992. High- versus low-dose oxytocin for labor stimulation. Obstetrics and Gynecology 80:111–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uyar Y, Erbay G, Demir BC, Baytur Y. 2009. Comparison of the Bishop score, body mass index and transvaginal cervical length in predicting the success of labor induction. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 280:357–362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vrouenraets FP, Roumen FJ, Dehing CJ, Van Den Akker ES, Aarts MJ, Scheve EJ. 2005. Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labour in nulliparous women. Obstetrics & Gynecology 105:690–697.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wing DA, Tran S, Paul RH. 2002. Factors affecting the likelihood of successful induction after intravaginal misoprostol application for cervical ripening and labour induction. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 186:1237–1240. discussion 1240–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organisation [Internet]. 2017. Global database on body mass index:BMI classification; [cited 2017 Aug 7]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/bmi/index.jsp?introPage=intro_3.html
   Google Scholar
• Xenakis EM, Piper JM, Conway DL, Langer O. 1997. Induction of labor in the nineties: conquering the unfavorable cervix. Obstetrics and Gynecology 90:235–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar