Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the rate of preterm birth (PTB) in a subsequent pregnancy in women who had undergone term induction using a Foley catheter compared with prostaglandins. Methods: This was a follow-up study of two large randomized controlled trials (PROBAAT-1 and PROBAAT-2). In the original trials, women with a term singleton pregnancy with the fetus in cephalic presentation and with an indication for labor induction were randomized to receive either a 30-mL Foley catheter or prostaglandins (vaginal prostaglandin E2 in PROBAAT-1 and oral misoprostol in PROBAAT-2). Data on subsequent ongoing pregnancies > 16 weeks’ gestation were collected from hospital charts from clinics participating in this follow-up study. The main outcome measure was preterm birth < 37 weeks’ gestation in a subsequent pregnancy. Results: Fourteen hospitals agreed to participate in this follow-up study. Of the 1142 eligible women, 572 had been allocated to induction of labor using a Foley catheter and 570 to induction of labor using prostaglandins. Of these, 162 (14%) were lost to follow-up. In total, 251 and 258 women had a known subsequent pregnancy > 16 weeks' gestation in the Foley catheter and prostaglandin groups, respectively. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. The overall rate of PTB in a subsequent pregnancy was 9/251 (3.6%) in the Foley catheter group vs 10/258 (3.9%) in the prostaglandin group (relative risk (RR), 0.93; 95% CI, 0.38–2.24), and the rate of spontaneous PTB was 5/251 (2.0%) vs 5/258 (1.9%) (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.30–3.51). Conclusion: In women with term singleton pregnancy, induction of labor using a 30-mL Foley catheter is not associated with an increased risk of PTB in a subsequent pregnancy, as compared to induction of labor using prostaglandins.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 292-297 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2021 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:We thank all the women who participated in the PROBAAT trials and all participating institutions and their staff for their contribution to this follow-up study. The original PROBAAT-2 trial was funded by FondsNutsOhra. For the PROBAAT-1 trial and this follow-up study, no funding was received. M.V. received a doctoral grant for teachers by The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (023.011.051). B.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). Funding sources had no role in design, execution, analyses, interpretation or decision to submit results. B.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck KGaA and Guerbet.
Funding Information:
The original PROBAAT‐2 trial was funded by FondsNutsOhra. For the PROBAAT‐1 trial and this follow‐up study, no funding was received. M.V. received a doctoral grant for teachers by The Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (023.011.051). B.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). Funding sources had no role in design, execution, analyses, interpretation or decision to submit results.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.