Search

OBJECTIVE: We sought to study long-term (neuro)developmental and behavioral outcome of pregnancies complicated by intrauterine growth restriction at term in relation to induction of labor or an expectant management. STUDY DESIGN: Parents of 2-year-old children included in the Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial at Term (DIGITAT) answered the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) and Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). RESULTS: We approached 582 (89.5%) of 650 parents. The response rate was 50%. Of these children, 27% had an abnormal score on the ASQ and 13% on the CBCL. Results of the ASQ and the CBCL for the 2 policies were comparable. Low birthweight, positive Morbidity Assessment Index score, and admission to intermediate care increased the risk of an abnormal outcome of the ASQ. This effect was not seen for the CBCL. CONCLUSION: In women with intrauterine growth restriction at term, neither a policy of induction of labor nor expectant management affect developmental and behavioral outcome when compared to expectant management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial at Term (DIGITAT) compared induction of labor and expectant management in suspected intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) at term. In this subanalysis, we report neonatal morbidity between the policies based on the Morbidity Assessment Index for Newborns (MAIN). STUDY DESIGN: We used data from the DIGITAT. For each neonate, we calculated the MAIN score, a validated outcome scale. RESULTS: There were no differences in mean MAIN scores or in MAIN morbidity categories. We found that neonatal admissions are lower after 38 weeks' gestational age compared with 36 and 37 weeks in both groups. CONCLUSION: The incidence of neonatal morbidity in IUGR at term is comparable and relatively mild either after induction or after an expectant policy. However, neonatal admissions are lower after 38 weeks of pregnancy, so if induction to preempt possible stillbirth is considered, it is reasonable to delay until 38 weeks, provided watchful monitoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial at Term (DIGITAT trial) showed that in women with suspected intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) at term, there were no substantial outcome differences between induction of labour and expectant monitoring. The objective of the present analysis is to evaluate whether maternal or fetal markers could identify IUGR fetuses who would benefit from early labour induction., Study Design: The DIGITAT trial was a multicenter, parallel and open-label randomised controlled trial in women who had a singleton pregnancy beyond 36+0 weeks' gestation with suspected IUGR (n=650). Women had been randomly allocated to either labour induction or expectant monitoring. The primary outcome was a composite measure of adverse neonatal outcome, defined as neonatal death before hospital discharge, Apgar score <7, umbilical artery pH <7.05, or admission to neonatal intensive care. Using logistic regression modelling, we investigated associations between outcome and 17 markers, maternal characteristics and fetal sonographic and Doppler velocimetry measurements, all collected at study entry., Results: 17 (5.3%) infants in the induction group had an adverse neonatal outcome compared to 20 (6.1%) in the expectant monitoring group. The only potentially informative marker for inducing labour was maternal pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI). Otherwise, we observed at best weak associations between a benefit from labour induction and maternal age, ethnicity, smoking, parity, pregnancy-induced hypertension or preeclampsia, Bishop score and gestational age, or fetal sonographic markers (gender, estimated fetal weight, body measurements, oligohydramnios, or umbilical artery pulsatility index and end diastolic flow)., Conclusion: In late preterm and term pregnancies complicated by suspected intrauterine growth restriction, most of the known prognostic markers seem unlikely to be helpful in identifying women who could benefit from labour induction, except for maternal pre-pregnancy BMI., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)