ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024
Use of vaginal dinoprostone for women with term prelabor rupture of membranes and an unfavorable cervix within 6 h versus within 6-24 h.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost guidelines propose inducing labor within 24 h following term (37 or more weeks of gestation) prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM). However, the exact timing for initiating induction within the 24 h period remains unknown. This study aims to comparatively assess the efficacy and safety of the use of vaginal dinoprostone within 6 h versus within 6-24 h for singleton pregnancies with PROM and an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 6).
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study including singleton pregnancies with PROM and an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 6) in which labor was induced using vaginal dinoprostone. Women were divided into two groups according to the timing of the use of induction (within 6 h versus within 6-24 h after PROM). Baseline maternal data, maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded for statistical analysis.
results450 women were included, 146 (32.4%) of whom were induced within 6 h of PROM and 304 (67.6%) were induced within 6-24 h. Cesarean delivery rate (15.8% versus 29.3%, p = 0.002) and nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing (4.8% versus 10.5%, p = 0.043) in group with vaginal dinoprostone within 6 h were significantly lower than those in group with vaginal dinoprostone within 6-24 h. There was no significant differences in terms of duration from IOL to vaginal delivery.
conclusionInduction of labor within 6 h with vaginal dinoprostone after PROM for singleton pregnancies with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 6) significantly associated with less cesarean section, less nonreassuring fetal heart rate tracing, compared to induction of labor within 6-24 h after PROM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.