Induction of labor versus expectant management of large-for-gestational-age infants in nulliparous women.

Abstract

There is no apparent consensus on obstetric management, i.e., induction of labor or expectant management of women with suspected large-for-gestational-age (LGA)-fetuses.To further examine the subject, a nationwide population-based cohort study from the Swedish Medical Birth Register in nulliparous non-diabetic women with singleton, vertex LGA (>90th centile) births, 1992-2013, was performed. Delivery of a live-born LGA infant induced at 38 completed weeks of gestation in non-preeclamptic pregnancies, was compared to those of expectant management, with delivery at 39, 40, 41, or 42 completed weeks of gestation and beyond, either by labor induction or via spontaneous labor. Primary outcome was mode of delivery. Secondary outcomes included obstetric anal sphincter injury, 5-minute Apgar<7 and birth injury. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to control for potential confounding. We found that among the 722 women induced at week 38, there was a significantly increased risk of cesarean delivery (aOR = 1.44 95% CI:1.20-1.72), compared to those with expectant management (n = 44 081). There was no significant difference between the groups in regards to risk of instrumental vaginal delivery (aOR = 1.05, 95% CI:0.85-1.30), obstetric anal sphincter injury (aOR = 0.81, 95% CI:0.55-1.19), nor 5-minute Apgar<7 (aOR = 1.06, 95% CI:0.58-1.94) or birth injury (aOR = 0.82, 95% CI:0.49-1.38). Similar comparisons for induction of labor at 39, 40 or 41 weeks compared to expectant management with delivery at a later gestational age, showed increased rates of cesarean delivery for induced women.In women with LGA infants, induction of labor at 38 weeks gestation is associated with increased risk of cesarean delivery compared to expectant management, with no difference in neonatal morbidity.