Passive second stage of labor: Does a fourth hour increase maternal morbidity in nulliparous patients at term with epidural?

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction Pub Date : 2024-06-25 DOI:10.1016/j.jogoh.2024.102818
Hélène Collinot , Anna Miloradovic Klein , Camille Guilhard , Aude Girault , Camille Le Ray , François Goffinet
{"title":"Passive second stage of labor: Does a fourth hour increase maternal morbidity in nulliparous patients at term with epidural?","authors":"Hélène Collinot ,&nbsp;Anna Miloradovic Klein ,&nbsp;Camille Guilhard ,&nbsp;Aude Girault ,&nbsp;Camille Le Ray ,&nbsp;François Goffinet","doi":"10.1016/j.jogoh.2024.102818","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Prolonging the passive second stage of labor could increase vaginal birth rate, but the data concerning maternal and fetal morbidity are contradictory. The French guidelines did not specify a maximum duration of the passive second stage. Our objective was to assess if allowing a 4th hour after full dilatation before pushing increased maternal morbidity, compared to 3 h after full dilatation.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>This single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study took place from January 1–December 31, 2020, in a tertiary maternity unit. All consecutive term nulliparous women who delivered under epidural anesthesia and without pathological fetal heart rate and reaching a second-stage passive phase of labor lasting at least 3 h were included. We compared 2 groups according to the duration of the passive second stage: “3-hour group” and “4-hour group”. In the \"3-hour group,\" featuring a second-stage passive phase of up to 3 h, pushing is initiated for favorable conditions, while a cesarean section is performed if conditions are deemed unfavorable. In the \"4-hour group\", obstetric conditions not justifying immediate pushing after three hours, and the obstetric team believed that an additional hour of expectant management could lead to a successful vaginal delivery. The principal endpoint was a composite criterion of maternal morbidity including obstetric anal sphincter injuries, postpartum hemorrhage, transfusion and intrauterine infection.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We included 111 patients in the “4-hour group” and 349 in the “3-hour group”. Composite maternal morbidity did not increase in the “4-hour group” compared to the “3-hour group” (21 (18.9 %) versus 61 (17.5 %); <em>p</em> = 0.73). Neonatal morbidity was similar between the two groups. In the “4-hour group, 91 (82 %) patients had vaginal deliveries”, 62 (55,9 %) by spontaneous vaginal delivery and 29 (26,1 %) with instrumental assistance.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>For selected patients, waiting for 4 h at full dilation can be beneficial due to the high rate of vaginal delivery and low incidence of maternal and fetal complications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15871,"journal":{"name":"Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction","volume":"53 9","pages":"Article 102818"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468784724000965","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Prolonging the passive second stage of labor could increase vaginal birth rate, but the data concerning maternal and fetal morbidity are contradictory. The French guidelines did not specify a maximum duration of the passive second stage. Our objective was to assess if allowing a 4th hour after full dilatation before pushing increased maternal morbidity, compared to 3 h after full dilatation.

Study design

This single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study took place from January 1–December 31, 2020, in a tertiary maternity unit. All consecutive term nulliparous women who delivered under epidural anesthesia and without pathological fetal heart rate and reaching a second-stage passive phase of labor lasting at least 3 h were included. We compared 2 groups according to the duration of the passive second stage: “3-hour group” and “4-hour group”. In the "3-hour group," featuring a second-stage passive phase of up to 3 h, pushing is initiated for favorable conditions, while a cesarean section is performed if conditions are deemed unfavorable. In the "4-hour group", obstetric conditions not justifying immediate pushing after three hours, and the obstetric team believed that an additional hour of expectant management could lead to a successful vaginal delivery. The principal endpoint was a composite criterion of maternal morbidity including obstetric anal sphincter injuries, postpartum hemorrhage, transfusion and intrauterine infection.

Results

We included 111 patients in the “4-hour group” and 349 in the “3-hour group”. Composite maternal morbidity did not increase in the “4-hour group” compared to the “3-hour group” (21 (18.9 %) versus 61 (17.5 %); p = 0.73). Neonatal morbidity was similar between the two groups. In the “4-hour group, 91 (82 %) patients had vaginal deliveries”, 62 (55,9 %) by spontaneous vaginal delivery and 29 (26,1 %) with instrumental assistance.

Conclusion

For selected patients, waiting for 4 h at full dilation can be beneficial due to the high rate of vaginal delivery and low incidence of maternal and fetal complications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
被动第二产程:在使用硬膜外麻醉的无产道临产患者中,第四个小时是否会增加产妇的发病率?
目的:延长被动第二产程可提高阴道分娩率,但有关产妇和胎儿发病率的数据却相互矛盾。法国指南并未规定被动第二产程的最长持续时间。我们的目的是评估与宫口完全扩张后 3 小时相比,宫口完全扩张后第 4 小时再用力是否会增加产妇的发病率:这项单中心、回顾性、观察性队列研究于 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日在一家三级产科医院进行。所有在硬膜外麻醉下分娩、无病理性胎心率且达到第二产程被动期至少 3 小时的连续足月无痛分娩产妇均被纳入研究。我们根据第二产程被动期的持续时间将其分为两组:"3 小时组 "和 "4 小时组"。在 "3 小时组 "中,第二产程被动期最长为 3 小时,在条件允许的情况下开始用力,如果条件不允许,则进行剖宫产。在 "4 小时组 "中,产科条件不允许在 3 小时后立即用力,产科团队认为再进行 1 小时的预产期管理就能成功阴道分娩。主要终点是产妇发病率的综合标准,包括产科肛门括约肌损伤、产后出血、输血和宫内感染:结果:"4 小时组 "和 "3 小时组 "分别有 111 名和 349 名患者。与 "3 小时组 "相比,"4 小时组 "的产妇综合发病率没有增加(21 例(18.9%)对 61 例(17.5%);P = 0.73)。两组的新生儿发病率相似。在 "4 小时组 "中,91 名患者(82%)经阴道分娩,其中 62 名(55.9%)经阴道自然分娩,29 名(26.1%)经器械助产:结论:对于选定的患者,在宫口完全扩张时等待 4 小时是有益的,因为阴道分娩率高,母体和胎儿并发症发生率低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction
Journal of gynecology obstetrics and human reproduction Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.30%
发文量
210
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Formerly known as Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction, Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human Reproduction is the official Academic publication of the French College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (Collège National des Gynécologues et Obstétriciens Français / CNGOF). J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod publishes monthly, in English, research papers and techniques in the fields of Gynecology, Obstetrics, Neonatology and Human Reproduction: (guest) editorials, original articles, reviews, updates, technical notes, case reports, letters to the editor and guidelines. Original works include clinical or laboratory investigations and clinical or equipment reports. Reviews include narrative reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
期刊最新文献
Editorial board Contents New reference charts for fetal ultrasound corpus callosum length with emphasis on the third trimester High-risk patient profiles for ovarian cancer: A new approach using cluster analysis of tumor markers Partners experiences of caesarean deliveries in the operating room
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1