Cervicovaginal fetal Fibronectin in Predicting Success of Induced Labour among Nulliparous Women
Main Article Content
Keywords
Fetal fibronectin, Induction of labour, Misoprostol, Bishop’s score
Abstract
Background: Induction of labour is a routine and common obstetric intervention which aims at achieving successful vaginal delivery. Over the years, attempts have been made to find a pre-induction test that can predict the success of induced labour, which may also serve as a selection criterion for determining which women should undergo labour induction. The study aims to determine whether the presence of fetal fibronectin in the cervicovaginal secretion can predict the success of induced labour.
Methodology: This was a cohort study involving 137 nulliparous women at term undergoing induction of labour. The presence of fetal fibronectin in the cervicovaginal secretion was determined using a fetal fibronectin rapid immunoassay kit. Induction of labour was done using misoprostol.
Results: Data obtained were analysed using statistical product and service solutions (IBM-SPSS) version 20.0. Data obtained were tested for normality of distribution and compared by Chi square, Students’ t-test, or Mann-Whitney U as appropriate. A p-value of less than 0.05 was regarded as significant. The rate of vaginal delivery was not significantly different between fetal fibronectin positive and negative women (65% vs. 66.7%, p value—0.839). Women who were positive for fibronectin had a significantly shorter mean duration of induction (22.8+6.1 hours versus 30.1 + 11.1 hours, P value of 0.015), had higher bishop’s scores, and required fewer doses of misoprostol. Regression analysis did not find fetal fibronectin to be predictive of vaginal delivery.
Conclusion: The Presence of fetal fibronectin was not predictive of successful labour induction. Its presence may possibly be associated with a relatively shorter duration of induction.
References
2. Loto OM, Ayuba II, Adebara IO, Ikuomola AA, Onwudiegwu U. A Randomized clinical trial of Misoprostol and Oxytocin for induction of labour. Nep J Obstet Gynaecol. 2010;5(1): 44-48.
3. Ade-Ojo IP, Akintayo AA. Induction of labour in the developing countries- an overview. J. Med. Med. Sci.2013; 4(7): 258-262.
4. Everett F, Songthip T, Christina D. Maternal and perinatal outcomes of indicated inductions of labour. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016; 29(14):2240-2244
5. Richard F, Nicole M, Krystal H, Lori A. A comparison of induction of labour success rates over three time periods in 20 years at a single academic tertiary care center: are we improving vaginal delivery rates?. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018; 31(7): 907-913.
6. Diny G. E, Kolkman Corine J. M, Verhoeven Sophie J. The Bishop Score as a Predictor of Labour Induction Success: A Systematic Review. Amer J Perinatol 2013; 30(08): 625-630
7. Roman H, Verspyck E. The role of ultrasound and fetal fibronectin in predicting the length of induced labor when the cervix is unfavourable. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2004; 23: 567–573
8. Cristina P, María T, Luis L, Julia D. Development of a Predictive Model for Induction Success of Labour. IJIMAI 2017; 4(7): 21-28.
9. N. Baños, F. Migliorelli, E. Posadas, J. Ferreri, “Definition of Failed Induction of Labor and Its Predictive Factors: Two Unsolved Issues of an Everyday Clinical Situation. Fetal Diagn Ther, 2015; 38(3): 161-169.
10 Mahendroo M. Cervical remodelling in term and preterm birth: insights from an animal model. Reproduction. 2012; 143:429–438.
11 Mozurkewich EL, Chilimigras JL, Berman DR, Perni UC, Romero VC. Methods of induction of labour: a systematic review, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2011, 11:84
12 Loto OM, Ikuomola AA, Ayuba IB, Onwudiegwu U. Comparative study of the outcome of induction of labor using 25 μg and 50 μg of vaginal misoprostol, J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med., 2012; 25(11): 2359–2362
13 Chodankar, R., Sood, A., Gupta, J. An overview of the past, current and future trends for cervical ripening in induction of labour. Obstet Gynaecol. 2017; 19:219–226
14 Jozwiak M, Bloemenkamp K.W, Kelly A.J, Mol B.W, Irion, O, Boulvain M. Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; CD001233.
15 Ezebialu IU, Eke AC, Eleje GU, Nwachukwu CE. Methods for assessing pre-induction cervical ripening (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jun 12;(6):CD010762.
16 Londero AP, Schmitz R, Bertozzi S, Driul L, Fruscalzo A. Diagnostic accuracy of cervical elastography in predicting labor induction success: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Perinat Med. 2016 Mar;44(2):167-78.
17 Al-Adwy AM, Sobh SM. Diagnostic accuracy of posterior cervical angle and cervical length in the prediction of successful induction of labour. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2018 Apr;141(1):102-107.
18 Bailit JL, Downs SM, Thorp JM. Reducing the caesarean delivery risk in elective inductions of labour: A decision analysis. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2002; 16:90-96.
19 Adeniji A.O, Oladokun A, Omigbodun AO Cervico-vaginal foetal fibronectin: A predictor of cervical response at preinduction cervical ripening. West Afr J Med 2005;24(4): 334-337
20 Blanch G, Oláh KS, Walkinshaw S. The presence of fetal fibronectin in the cervicovaginal secretions of women at term—Its role in the assessment of women before labour induction and in the investigation in the physiologic mechanisms of labour. Am J Obst Gynecol 1996;174(1):262-266
21 Reis FM, Gervasi MT, Florio P, Bracalente G, Fadalti M, Severi FM, Prediction of successful induction of labor at term: Role of clinical history, digital examination, ultrasound assessment of the cervix, and fetal fibronectin assay. Am J Obst Gynecol 2003;189(5):1361-1367
22 Ahner R, Egarter C, Kiss H, Heinzl K, Zeillinger R, Schatten C. Fetal fibronectin as a selection criterion for induction of labour. Am J Obst Gynecol 1995;173(5):1513-7.
23. Jaykaran C, Tamoghna B. How to Calculate Sample Size for Different Study Designs in Medical Research Indian J Psychol Med 2013;35(2):121-126
24 Uygur D, Deveer R. Fetal fibronectin is more valuable than ultrasonographic examination of the cervix or Bishop score in predicting successful induction of labour. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 55: 94-97
25 Sciscione A, Matthew K, Fetal Fibronectin as a Predictor of Vaginal Birth in Nulliparas Undergoing Preinduction Cervical Ripening. Am J Obst Gynecol 2005; 106(5): 980-985
26 Garite TJ, Casal D, Garcia-Alonso A, Kreaden U, Jimenez G, Ayala JA. Fetal fibronectin: a new tool for the prediction of successful induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(6):1516-21.
27 Ojutiku D, Jones G, Bewley S. Quantitative foetal fibronectin as a predictor of successful induction of labour in post-date pregnancies. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2002;101(2):143-6.
28 Droulez A, Girard R, Dumas AM, Mathian B, Berland M. Prediction of successful induction of labor: a comparison between fetal fibronectin assay and the Bishop score. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod. 2008;37(7):691-6
29. Ade-Ojo IP, Kuti O, Loto OM, Ogunniyi SO. A Prospective Comparison of the 30-Minute and 60-Minute Oxytocin Dose Incremental Schedules for Induction of Labor at Term. Nep J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;6(1):35-40
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access journal and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike License 4.0. This licence allows users to download and share, remix, tweak and build upon the article for non-commercial purposes, so long as the original authorship is acknowledged and the new creations are licensed under identical terms.