Display options
Cite
López-Jiménez N, García-Sánchez F, Hernández-Pailos R, et al. Risk of caesarean delivery in labour induction: a systematic review and external validation of predictive models. BJOG. 2021;doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16947.
López-Jiménez, N., García-Sánchez, F., Hernández-Pailos, R., Rodrigo-Álvaro, V., Pascual-Pedreño, A., Moreno-Cid, M., Delgado-Rodríguez, M., & Hernández-Martínez, A. (2021). Risk of caesarean delivery in labour induction: a systematic review and external validation of predictive models. BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, . https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16947
López-Jiménez, N, et al. "Risk of caesarean delivery in labour induction: a systematic review and external validation of predictive models." BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology vol. (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16947
López-Jiménez N, García-Sánchez F, Hernández-Pailos R, Rodrigo-Álvaro V, Pascual-Pedreño A, Moreno-Cid M, Delgado-Rodríguez M, Hernández-Martínez A. Risk of caesarean delivery in labour induction: a systematic review and external validation of predictive models. BJOG. 2021 Sep 24; doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16947. Epub 2021 Sep 24. PMID: 34559942.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

BJOG. 2021 Sep 24; doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.16947. Epub 2021 Sep 24.

Risk of caesarean delivery in labour induction: a systematic review and external validation of predictive models.

BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology

N López-Jiménez, F García-Sánchez, R Hernández-Pailos, V Rodrigo-Álvaro, A Pascual-Pedreño, M Moreno-Cid, M Delgado-Rodríguez, A Hernández-Martínez

Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, La Mancha Centro Hospital, Alcázar de San Juan, Ciudad Real, Spain.
  2. Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain.
  3. Department of Health Sciences, University of Jaen, Jaen, Spain.
  4. Department of Nursing, Faculty of Nursing of Ciudad Real, University of Castilla-La Mancha, Ciudad Real, Spain.

PMID: 34559942 DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16947

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the existence of numerous published models predicting the risk of caesarean delivery in women undergoing induction of labour (IOL), validated models are scarce.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically review and externally assess the predictive capacity of caesarean delivery risk models in women undergoing IOL.

SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies published up to 15 January 2021 were identified through PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov, without temporal or language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies describing the derivation of new models for predicting the risk of caesarean delivery in labour induction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently screened the articles and assessed the risk of bias (ROB) according to the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST). External validation was performed in a prospective cohort of 468 pregnancies undergoing IOL from February 2019 to August 2020. The predictive capacity of the models was assessed by creating areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs), calibration plots and decision curve analysis (DCA).

MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen studies met the eligibility criteria; 12 predictive models were validated. The quality of most of the included studies was not adequate. The AUC of the models varied from 0.520 to 0.773. The three models with the best discriminative capacity were those of Levine et al. (AUC 0.773, 95% CI 0.720-0.827), Hernández et al. (AUC 0.762, 95% CI 0.715-0.809) and Rossi et al. (AUC 0.752, 95% CI 0.707-0.797).

CONCLUSIONS: Predictive capacity and methodological quality were limited; therefore, we cannot currently recommend the use of any of the models for decision making in clinical practice.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Predictive models that predict the risk of cesarean section in labor inductions are currently not applicable.

© 2021 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Keywords: Caesarean delivery; induction of labour; predictive model

References

  1. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK, Driscoll AK. Births: final data for 2018. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2019;68:1-47. - PubMed
  2. Zeitlin J, Mohangoo A, Delnord M. European Perinatal Health Report. The health and care of pregnant women and babies in Europe in 2010. 2013. - PubMed
  3. Vogel JP, Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM. Patterns and outcomes of induction of labour in Africa and Asia: a secondary analysis of the WHO Global Survey on maternal and neonatal health. PLoS One 2013;8:e65612. - PubMed
  4. Coates D, Donnolley N, Foureur M, Henry A. Women’s experiences of decision-making and attitudes in relation to induction of labour: a survey study. Women Birth 2021;34:e170-7. - PubMed
  5. Coates R, Cupples G, Scamell A, McCourt C. Women’s experiences of induction of labour: qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis. Midwifery 2019;69:17-28 - PubMed
  6. Rossi RM, Requarth E, Warshak CR, Dufendach KR, Hall ES, DeFranco EA. Risk calculator to predict cesarean delivery among women undergoing induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2020;135:559-68. - PubMed
  7. Jochum F, Le Ray C, Blanc-Petitjean P, Langer B, Meyer N, Severac F, et␣al. Externally validated score to predict cesarean delivery after labor induction with cervi ripening. Obstet Gynecol 2019;134:502-10. - PubMed
  8. Kim SN, Park KH, Jung HJ, Hong JS, Shin DM, Kang WS. Clinical and sonographic parameters at 37 weeks’ gestation for predicting the risk of primary cesarean delivery in nulliparous women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;36:486-92. - PubMed
  9. Peregrine E, O’Brien P, Omar R, Jauniaux E. Clinical and ultrasound parameters to predict the risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:227-33. - PubMed
  10. Rane SM, Guirgis RR, Higgins B, Nicolaides KH. Models for the prediction of successful induction of labor based on pre-induction sonographic measurement of cervical length. J Matern Neonatal Med 2005;17:315-22. - PubMed
  11. Smith GCS, Dellens M, White IR, Pell JP. Combined logistic and Bayesian modeling of cesarean section risk. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:2029-34. - PubMed
  12. Herman A, Groutzd A, Bukovsky I, Arieli S, Sherman D, Caspi E. A simplified preinduction scoring method for the prediction of successful vaginal delivery based on multivariate analysis of pelvic and other obstetrical factors. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1994;49:91-3. - PubMed
  13. Sievert RA, Kuper SG, Jauk VC, Parrish M, Biggio JR, Harper LM. Predictors of vaginal delivery in medically indicated early preterm induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;217:375.e1-7. - PubMed
  14. Danilack VA, Hutcheon JA, Triche EW, Dore DD, Muri JH, Phipps MG, et␣al. Development and validation of a risk prediction model for cesarean delivery after labor induction. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2020;29:656-69. - PubMed
  15. Levine LD, Downes KL, Parry S, Elovitz MA, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. A validated calculator to estimate risk of cesarean after an induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018;218:254.e1-7. - PubMed
  16. Branger B, Dochez V, Gervier S, Winer N. Cesarean after labor induction: risk factors and prediction score. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol 2018;46:458-65. - PubMed
  17. Migliorelli F, Baños N, Angeles M, Rueda C, Salazar L, Gratacós E, et␣al. Clinical and sonographic model to predict cesarean delivery after induction of labor at term. Fetal Diagn Ther 2019;46:88-96. - PubMed
  18. Papoutsis D, Antonakou A, Gornall A, Tzavara C, Mohajer M. The SaTH risk-assessment tool for the prediction of emergency cesarean section in women having induction of labor for all indications: a large-cohort based study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2017;295:59-66. - PubMed
  19. Hernández-Martínez A, Pascual-Pedreño AI, Baño-Garnés AB, Melero-Jiménez MR, Tenías-Burillo JM, Molina-Alarcón M. Predictive model for risk of cesarean section in pregnant women after induction of labor. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2016;293:529-38. - PubMed
  20. Tolcher MC, Holbert MR, Weaver AL, McGree ME, Olson JE, Sherif A, et␣al. Predicting cesarean delivery after induction of labor among nulliparous women at term. Obstet Gynecol 2015;126:1059-68. - PubMed
  21. Isono W, Nagamatsu T, Uemura Y, Fujii T, Hyodo H, Yamashita T, et␣al. Prediction model for the incidence of emergent cesarean section during induction of labor specialized in nulliparous low-risk women. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2011;37:1784-91. - PubMed
  22. Kleinrouweler CE, Cheong-See FM, Collins GS, Kwee A, Thangaratinam S, Khan KS, et␣al. Prognostic models in obstetrics: available, but far from applicable. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016;214:79-90.e36. - PubMed
  23. Moons KGM, de Groot JAH, Bouwmeester W, Vergouwe Y, Mallett S, Altman DG, et␣al. Critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modelling studies: the CHARMS Checklist. PLoS Med 2014;11:e1001744. - PubMed
  24. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097. - PubMed
  25. Nader R, Shek KL, Dietz HP. Predicting the outcome of induction of labour. Aust New Zeal J Obstet Gynaecol 2010;50:329-33. - PubMed
  26. Pitarello PDRP, Tadashi Yoshizaki C, Ruano R, Zugaib M. Prediction of successful labor induction using transvaginal sonographic cervical measurements. J Clin Ultrasound 2013;41:76-83. - PubMed
  27. Grobman WA, Sandoval G, Rice MM, Bailit JL, Chauhan SP, Costantine MM, et␣al. Prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in term gestations: a calculator without race and ethnicity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;24:S0002-9378(21)00587-1. www.ajog.org/article/S0002937821005871/fulltext - PubMed
  28. Wolff RF, Moons KGM, Riley RD, Whiting PF, Westwood M, Collins GS, et␣al. PROBAST: a tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Intern Med 2019;170:51-8. - PubMed
  29. Moons KGM, Wolff RF, Riley RD, Whiting PF, Westwood M, Collins GS, et␣al. PROBAST: a tool to assess risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2019;170:W1-33. - PubMed
  30. Sociedad Española de Ginecología y Obstetricia Inducción de parto. Protocolos prosego. Inducción del parto. Protocolos prosego. 2013 [www.sego.es]. Accessed 15 April 2020. - PubMed
  31. Riley RD, Debray TPA, Collins GS, Archer L, Ensor J, van Smeden M, et␣al. Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical␣prediction model with a binary outcome. Stat Med 2021;40:4230-51. - PubMed
  32. Parer JT, Ikeda T, King TL. The 2008 national institute of child health and human development report on fetal heart rate monitoring. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:136-8. - PubMed
  33. Kagan KO, Sonek J. How to measure cervical length. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:358-62. - PubMed
  34. Cervical assessment | Education | Welcome to the Fetal Medicine Foundation [Internet] [https://fetalmedicine.org/education/cervical-assessment]. Accessed 27 April 2020. - PubMed
  35. Nattino G, Finazzi S, Bertolini G. A new test and graphical tool to assess the goodness of fit of logistic regression models. Stat Med 2016;35:709-20. - PubMed
  36. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Mak 2006;26:565-74. - PubMed
  37. Meier K, Parrish J, D’Souza R. Prediction models for determining the success of labor induction: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2019;98:1100-12. - PubMed
  38. Snell KIE, Archer L, Ensor J, Bonnett LJ, Debray TPA, Phillips B, et␣al. External validation of clinical prediction models: simulation-based sample size calculations were more reliable than rules-of-thumb. J Clin Epidemiol 2021;135:79-89. - PubMed
  39. Wilson PWF, Agostino RBD, Levy D, Belanger AM, Silbershatz H, Kannel WB. Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation 1998;97:1837-47. - PubMed
  40. Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964;24:266-8. - PubMed
  41. Collins GS, De Groot JA, Dutton S, Omar O, Shanyinde M, Tajar A, et␣al. External validation of multivariable prediction models: a systematic review of methodological conduct and reporting. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014;14:1-12. - PubMed
  42. Ellis JA, Brown CM, Barger B, Carlson NS. Influence of maternal obesity on labor induction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Midwifery Womens Heal 2019;64:55-67. - PubMed
  43. Hamm RF, McCoy J, Oladuja A, Bogner HR, Elovitz MA, Morales KH, et␣al. Maternal morbidity and Birth satisfaction after implementation of a validated calculator to predict cesarean delivery during labor induction. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3:e2025582. - PubMed

Publication Types