Mode of delivery outcomes of induced versus spontaneous labor in individuals with dichorionic twins.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American journal of perinatology Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1055/a-2547-4074
Manasa Geeta Rao, Chelsea Ann DeBolt, Kelly Wang, Alexandra N Mills, Sonia G Khurana, Isabelle Band, Elianna Kaplowitz, Andrei Rebarber, Nathan S Fox, Joanne Stone
{"title":"Mode of delivery outcomes of induced versus spontaneous labor in individuals with dichorionic twins.","authors":"Manasa Geeta Rao, Chelsea Ann DeBolt, Kelly Wang, Alexandra N Mills, Sonia G Khurana, Isabelle Band, Elianna Kaplowitz, Andrei Rebarber, Nathan S Fox, Joanne Stone","doi":"10.1055/a-2547-4074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To investigate odds of vaginal delivery comparing induced versus spontaneous labor in nulliparas and multiparas with dichorionic twins.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective review of dichorionic twin pregnancies from 2008-2021. Those with scheduled or elective cesarean, malpresentation, prior uterine surgery, fetal anomaly, gestational age (GA) at delivery < 34 weeks, and multifetal reduction were excluded. Nulliparas and multiparas were analyzed separately. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery of both twins. Secondary outcomes included preterm delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). Outcomes were compared among induced versus spontaneous labor and assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 258 nulliparas, 176 (68.2%) were induced and 82 (31.8%) spontaneously labored. Induced patients were older (p=0.048), had higher proportion of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (IHCP) (p=0.04), HDP (p<0.0001) and later GA at delivery (p<0.0001). Patients who spontaneously labored had higher proportion of preterm delivery <37 (p<0.0001) and higher proportion of at least one twin admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (p=0.01). On univariable analysis, induction was associated with decreased likelihood of vaginal delivery of both twins (p=0.01). However, after adjusting for augmentation, GA at delivery, gestational diabetes, and HDP/chronic hypertension, this was no longer statistically significant (p=0.14). Among 239 multiparas, 108 (45.2%) were induced and 131 (54.8%) spontaneously labored. Induced patients had higher proportion IHCP (p=0.02), chronic hypertension (p=0.02), HDP (p<0.0001), and later GA at delivery (p<0.0001). Spontaneous labor patients had higher proportion of preterm delivery <37 (p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in odds of vaginal delivery between spontaneous versus induced labor on univariate (p=0.74) or adjusted analysis after controlling for augmentation, GA at delivery, gestational diabetes and HDP/chronic hypertension (p=0.40) among multiparas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among nulliparas and multiparas with dichorionic twins, induction of labor does not appear to be associated with decreased odds of vaginal delivery.</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2547-4074","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

Objective: To investigate odds of vaginal delivery comparing induced versus spontaneous labor in nulliparas and multiparas with dichorionic twins.

Study design: Retrospective review of dichorionic twin pregnancies from 2008-2021. Those with scheduled or elective cesarean, malpresentation, prior uterine surgery, fetal anomaly, gestational age (GA) at delivery < 34 weeks, and multifetal reduction were excluded. Nulliparas and multiparas were analyzed separately. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery of both twins. Secondary outcomes included preterm delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). Outcomes were compared among induced versus spontaneous labor and assessed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

Results: Among 258 nulliparas, 176 (68.2%) were induced and 82 (31.8%) spontaneously labored. Induced patients were older (p=0.048), had higher proportion of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (IHCP) (p=0.04), HDP (p<0.0001) and later GA at delivery (p<0.0001). Patients who spontaneously labored had higher proportion of preterm delivery <37 (p<0.0001) and higher proportion of at least one twin admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (p=0.01). On univariable analysis, induction was associated with decreased likelihood of vaginal delivery of both twins (p=0.01). However, after adjusting for augmentation, GA at delivery, gestational diabetes, and HDP/chronic hypertension, this was no longer statistically significant (p=0.14). Among 239 multiparas, 108 (45.2%) were induced and 131 (54.8%) spontaneously labored. Induced patients had higher proportion IHCP (p=0.02), chronic hypertension (p=0.02), HDP (p<0.0001), and later GA at delivery (p<0.0001). Spontaneous labor patients had higher proportion of preterm delivery <37 (p<0.0001). There was no significant difference in odds of vaginal delivery between spontaneous versus induced labor on univariate (p=0.74) or adjusted analysis after controlling for augmentation, GA at delivery, gestational diabetes and HDP/chronic hypertension (p=0.40) among multiparas.

Conclusion: Among nulliparas and multiparas with dichorionic twins, induction of labor does not appear to be associated with decreased odds of vaginal delivery.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
期刊最新文献
Unintended Upper Uterine Wall Extensions at the Time of Cesarean Delivery: Risk Factors and Associated Adverse Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes. Cost Comparison of a Traditional Didactic versus National Flipped Classroom Curriculum. Implementation of a Standardized Protocol for Postpartum Anemia: A Prospective Cohort Study. Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia: Pregnancy and Delivery-Specific Considerations and Outcomes. Spontaneous Umbilical Cord Vascular Rupture during Labor: A Retrospective Analysis of 12 Cases.
×
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