Time to redefine prolonged third stage of labor? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the length of the third stage of labor and adverse maternal outcome after vaginal birth

IF 8.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American journal of obstetrics and gynecology Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2024.07.019
Pauline L.M. de Vries , Emma Veenstra , David Baud , Hélène Legardeur , Athanasios F. Kallianidis , Thomas van den Akker
{"title":"Time to redefine prolonged third stage of labor? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the length of the third stage of labor and adverse maternal outcome after vaginal birth","authors":"Pauline L.M. de Vries ,&nbsp;Emma Veenstra ,&nbsp;David Baud ,&nbsp;Hélène Legardeur ,&nbsp;Athanasios F. Kallianidis ,&nbsp;Thomas van den Akker","doi":"10.1016/j.ajog.2024.07.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study aimed (1) to assess the association between the length of the third stage of labor and adverse maternal outcome after vaginal birth and (2) to evaluate whether earlier manual placenta removal reduces the risk of adverse outcome.</div></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><div>PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, <span><span>ClinicalTrials.gov</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>, the Cochrane Library, Journals@Ovid, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry were searched from January 1, 2000, to June 13, 2023.</div></div><div><h3>Study Eligibility Criteria</h3><div>All studies that assessed adverse maternal outcome, defined as any maternal complication after vaginal birth, concerning the length of the third stage of labor and the timing of manual placenta removal were included.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The included studies were evaluated using the Conducting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies of Etiology methodology. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Heterogeneity (<em>I</em><sup>2</sup> test) was assessed, subgroup analyses were performed, and 95% prediction intervals were calculated.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>To meet the first objective, 18 cohort studies were included. The assessed cutoff values for the length of the third stage of labor were 15, 30, and 60 minutes. Women with a third stage of labor of ≥15 minutes had an increased risk of postpartum hemorrhage compared with those with a third stage of labor of &lt;15 minutes (odds ratio, 5.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.74–17.72). For women without risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage, the odds ratio was 2.20 (95% confidence interval, 0.75–6.49). Among women with a third stage of labor of ≥60 minutes vs women with a third stage of labor of &lt;60 minutes, the odds ratio was 3.72 (95% confidence interval, 2.36–5.89). The incidence of red blood cell transfusion was higher for a third stage of labor of ≥30 minutes than for a third stage of labor of &lt;30 minutes (odds ratio, 3.23; 95% confidence interval, 2.26–4.61). Of note, 3 studies assessed the timing of placenta removal and the risk of adverse maternal outcome. However, the results could not be pooled because of the different outcome measures. Moreover, 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) reported a significantly higher incidence of hemodynamic compromise in women with manual placenta removal at 15 minutes than in women with manual placenta removal at 10 minutes (30/156 [19.2%] vs 10/156 [6.4%], respectively), whereas 2 observational studies reported a lower risk of bleeding among women without manual placenta removal.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Although the risk of adverse maternal outcome after vaginal birth increases when the third stage of labor exceeds 15 minutes, there is no convincing supporting evidence that reducing the length of the third stage of labor by earlier manual removal of the placenta can reduce the incidence of adverse maternal outcome.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7574,"journal":{"name":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","volume":"232 1","pages":"Pages 26-41.e11"},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002937824007622","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed (1) to assess the association between the length of the third stage of labor and adverse maternal outcome after vaginal birth and (2) to evaluate whether earlier manual placenta removal reduces the risk of adverse outcome.

Data Sources

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Library, Journals@Ovid, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry were searched from January 1, 2000, to June 13, 2023.

Study Eligibility Criteria

All studies that assessed adverse maternal outcome, defined as any maternal complication after vaginal birth, concerning the length of the third stage of labor and the timing of manual placenta removal were included.

Methods

The included studies were evaluated using the Conducting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies of Etiology methodology. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Heterogeneity (I2 test) was assessed, subgroup analyses were performed, and 95% prediction intervals were calculated.

Results

To meet the first objective, 18 cohort studies were included. The assessed cutoff values for the length of the third stage of labor were 15, 30, and 60 minutes. Women with a third stage of labor of ≥15 minutes had an increased risk of postpartum hemorrhage compared with those with a third stage of labor of <15 minutes (odds ratio, 5.55; 95% confidence interval, 1.74–17.72). For women without risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage, the odds ratio was 2.20 (95% confidence interval, 0.75–6.49). Among women with a third stage of labor of ≥60 minutes vs women with a third stage of labor of <60 minutes, the odds ratio was 3.72 (95% confidence interval, 2.36–5.89). The incidence of red blood cell transfusion was higher for a third stage of labor of ≥30 minutes than for a third stage of labor of <30 minutes (odds ratio, 3.23; 95% confidence interval, 2.26–4.61). Of note, 3 studies assessed the timing of placenta removal and the risk of adverse maternal outcome. However, the results could not be pooled because of the different outcome measures. Moreover, 1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) reported a significantly higher incidence of hemodynamic compromise in women with manual placenta removal at 15 minutes than in women with manual placenta removal at 10 minutes (30/156 [19.2%] vs 10/156 [6.4%], respectively), whereas 2 observational studies reported a lower risk of bleeding among women without manual placenta removal.

Conclusion

Although the risk of adverse maternal outcome after vaginal birth increases when the third stage of labor exceeds 15 minutes, there is no convincing supporting evidence that reducing the length of the third stage of labor by earlier manual removal of the placenta can reduce the incidence of adverse maternal outcome.
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
是时候重新定义产程延长的第三产程了吗?关于第三产程长度与阴道分娩后产妇不良结局的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:(1) 评估第三产程持续时间与阴道分娩后产妇不良结局之间的关系;(2) 评估提前人工剥离胎盘是否会降低不良结局的风险:数据来源:PubMed/MEDLINE、EMBASE、ClinicalTrials.gov、Cochrane Library、Journals@Ovid 和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册中心(2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2023 年 6 月 13 日):所有评估产妇不良结局(定义为阴道分娩后的任何产妇并发症)与第三产程持续时间和人工胎盘剥离时机相关性的研究:根据 COSMOS-E(病因观察研究的系统回顾和元分析)方法对纳入的研究进行评估。计算了汇总的几率比率及 95% 的置信区间。我们评估了异质性(I2 检验),进行了亚组分析,并计算了 95% 的预测区间:为了回答第一个目标,我们纳入了 18 项队列研究。第三阶段的评估截止时间分别为 15、30 和 60 分钟:15、30 和 60 分钟。与结论相比,第三产程≥15 分钟的产妇发生产后出血的风险更高:虽然阴道分娩后产妇不良预后的风险在第三产程超过 15 分钟时会增加,但没有令人信服的证据支持通过提前人工剥离胎盘来减少第三产程,从而降低产妇不良预后的发生率。
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
CiteScore
15.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
2237
审稿时长
47 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, known as "The Gray Journal," covers the entire spectrum of Obstetrics and Gynecology. It aims to publish original research (clinical and translational), reviews, opinions, video clips, podcasts, and interviews that contribute to understanding health and disease and have the potential to impact the practice of women's healthcare. Focus Areas: Diagnosis, Treatment, Prediction, and Prevention: The journal focuses on research related to the diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of obstetrical and gynecological disorders. Biology of Reproduction: AJOG publishes work on the biology of reproduction, including studies on reproductive physiology and mechanisms of obstetrical and gynecological diseases. Content Types: Original Research: Clinical and translational research articles. Reviews: Comprehensive reviews providing insights into various aspects of obstetrics and gynecology. Opinions: Perspectives and opinions on important topics in the field. Multimedia Content: Video clips, podcasts, and interviews. Peer Review Process: All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure quality and relevance to the field of obstetrics and gynecology.
期刊最新文献
Association of preeclampsia with metabolic syndrome features before, during and after pregnancy. Best Practices for Reducing Pain Associated with Intrauterine Device Placement. Risk of postpartum hemorrhage according to the planned mode of delivery among pregnant women with one previous cesarean delivery: a secondary analysis of the Lower Uterine Segment Trial (LUSTrial). Single dose intravenous iron versus oral iron for treatment of maternal iron deficiency anemia: A randomized clinical trial. Table of Contents
×
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