Resumo:
En
|
Texto:
En
|
PDF:
En
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the success rate and predictors of labor induction using vaginal misoprostol in a low-risk pregnant women population. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was carried out with 196 pregnant women. Groups 2 and 4 of the Robson Classification admitted for induction of labor with vaginal misoprostol (25 μg tablets every 6 h, up to 4 tablets, for a maximum of 24 h). The success of labor induction was considered the achievement of vaginal delivery. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the best predictors of successful induction of labor with vaginal misoprostol. RESULTS: Of all the pregnant women analyzed, 140 (71.4%) were successful and 56 (28.6%) were unsuccessful. Pregnant women who achieved successful induction had a higher number of pregnancies (1.69 vs. 1.36, p=0.023), a higher number of deliveries (0.57 vs. 0.19, p<0.001), a higher Bishop score (2.0 vs. 1.38, p=0.002), and lower misoprostol 25 μg tablets (2.18 vs. 2.57, p=0.031). No previous deliveries [x2(1)=3.14, odds ratio (OR): 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10–0.57, R2 Nagelkerke: 0.91, p=0.001] and the presence of one previous delivery [x2(1)=6.0, OR: 3.40, 95% CI: 1.13–10.16, R2 Nagelkerke: 0.043, p=0.029] were significant predictors of successful induction of labor with vaginal misoprostol. CONCLUSION: A high rate of labor induction success using vaginal misoprostol in a low-risk population was observed, mainly in multiparous and with gestational age>41 weeks. No previous delivery decreased the success of labor induction, while one previous delivery increased the success of labor induction. OBJECTIVE lowrisk low risk METHODS 19 (2 h h. . h) RESULTS analyzed 14 71.4% 714 71 (71.4% 5 28.6% 286 28 (28.6% unsuccessful 1.69 169 1 69 (1.6 vs 136 36 1.36 p=0.023, p0023 p p=0.023 , 0 023 p=0.023) 0.57 057 57 (0.5 019 0.19 p<0.001, p0001 p<0.001 001 p<0.001) 2.0 20 (2. 138 38 1.38 p=0.002, p0002 p=0.002 002 p=0.002) 2.18 218 18 (2.1 257 2.57 p=0.031. p0031 p=0.031 031 p=0.031) x21=3.14, x21314 x x2 =3.14, 3 [x2(1)=3.14 OR (OR) 024 0.24 95 CI (CI) 010057 10 0.10–0.57 R Nagelkerke 091 91 0.91 p=0.001 x21=6.0, x2160 =6.0, [x2(1)=6.0 340 40 3.40 1131016 13 16 1.13–10.16 0043 043 0.043 p=0.029 p0029 029 CONCLUSION observed age41 age 41 age>4 weeks ( 71.4 7 (71.4 28.6 (28.6 1.6 (1. 1.3 p002 p=0.02 02 0.5 05 (0. 01 0.1 p000 p<0.00 00 2. p=0.00 2.1 21 2.5 p003 p=0.03 03 x21 x21=3.14 x2131 314 =3.14 [x2(1)=3.1 (OR 0.2 9 (CI 01005 0.10–0.5 09 0.9 x21=6.0 x216 60 =6.0 [x2(1)=6. 34 3.4 113101 1.13–10.1 004 04 0.04 age4 age> 71. (71. 28. (28. 1. (1 p00 p=0.0 0. (0 p<0.0 x21=3.1 x213 31 =3.1 [x2(1)=3. 0100 0.10–0. x21=6. =6. [x2(1)=6 3. 11310 1.13–10. 0.0 (71 (28 p0 p=0. p<0. x21=3. =3. [x2(1)=3 010 0.10–0 x21=6 =6 [x2(1)= 1131 1.13–10 (7 p=0 p<0 x21=3 =3 0.10– x21= = [x2(1) 113 1.13–1 p= p< 0.10 [x2(1 11 1.13– [x2( 1.13 [x2 1.1 [x