<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Obstetrics and Gynecology</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Акушерство и гинекология</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">0300-9092</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2412-5679</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Bionika Media</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">247699</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.18565/aig.2016.7.28-33</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Статьи</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">The course and outcomes of labor in relation to management tactics during prolonged pregnancy</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Течение и исходы родов в зависимости от тактики ведения при пролонгированной беременности</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Tychychnyi</surname><given-names>O. V</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Тысячный</surname><given-names>Олег Владимирович</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>3rd year postgraduate student of the maternity departments</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>аспирант родильного отделения 3-го года обучения</p></bio><email>olti23@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Baev</surname><given-names>O. R</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Баев</surname><given-names>Олег Радомирович</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, PhD, professor, the head of Maternity Department</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>д.м.н., профессор, руководитель родильного отделения</p></bio><email>metod_obsgyn@hotmail.com</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Krechetova</surname><given-names>L. V</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Кречетова</surname><given-names>Любовь Валентиновна</given-names></name></name-alternatives><bio xml:lang="en"><p>PhD, the head of Laboratory of clinical immunology</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>к.м.н., руководитель лаборатория клинической иммунологии</p></bio><email>l_krechetova@oparina4.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, Ministry of Health of Russia</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">ФГБУ Научный центр акушерства, гинекологии и перинатологии им. академика В.И. Кулакова Минздрава России</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2016-07-15" publication-format="electronic"><day>15</day><month>07</month><year>2016</year></pub-date><issue>7</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en">NO7 (2016)</issue-title><issue-title xml:lang="ru">№7 (2016)</issue-title><fpage>28</fpage><lpage>33</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2023-02-18"><day>18</day><month>02</month><year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2016, Bionika Media</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2016, ООО «Бионика Медиа»</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2016</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Bionika Media</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">ООО «Бионика Медиа»</copyright-holder></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.eco-vector.com/0300-9092/article/view/247699">https://journals.eco-vector.com/0300-9092/article/view/247699</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The choice of wait-and-see or active tactics for prolonged and protracted pregnancy remains controversial. Objective. To compare the specif ic features of the course of labor and perinatal outcomes in women who tend to prolong pregnancy in relation to management tactics. Subjects and methods. 272 healthy primiparas at 284-285 days’ gestation were included in the study; 74 patients formed a control group; a wait-and-see tactic was used in 90 patients; labor preinduction was carried out in 108. Results. After taking mifepristone, uterine contractions occurred in 63% of the women. Preinduction was continued with dinoprostone in the others: 1 dose in 70%, 2 doses in 20%, and 3 doses in 10%. In the labor preinduction group, the rate of primary or secondary uterine inertia and dystocia was minimal, accounting for 16.6% versus 40%. In the wait-and-see tactic group, the risk of abnormal labor was 2.1 times higher than that in the control group. In the same group, the rate of oxytocin-augmented labor was significantly more common than that in the control group (30% versus 16.2%). The rate of birth to big large fetuses and babies with signs of postmaturity was seen more frequently in the wait-and-see tactic group (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusion. Labor preinduction in women tending to prolong pregnancy at 284-285 days is a rather effective and safe method to prevent complications, allows the lower rate of birth to postmature infants, and this does not contribute to the higher rate of cesarean section and poor perinatal outcomes.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p>Цель исследования. Сравнить особенности течения родов и перинатальные исходы у женщин с тенденцией к перенашиванию беременности в зависимости от тактики ведения. Материал и методы. 272 здоровые первородящие женщины в сроке 284-285 дней были включены в исследование. 74 пациентки - контрольная группа, 90 - выжидательная тактика, 108 - преиндукция родов. Результаты. После применения мифепристона у 63% женщин началась родовая деятельность. Остальным преиндукция была продолжена динопростоном, в 70% - 1 доза, в 20% - 2 дозы и в 10% - 3 дозы. Частота первичной, вторичной слабости и дискординации родовой деятельности в группе с преиндукцией родов была минимальной и составила 16,6% против 40%. Риск развития аномалий родовой деятельности был в 2,1 раз выше при использовании выжидательной тактики по сравнению с группой контроля. Частота родостимуляции окситоцином встречалась достоверно чаще в группе с выжидательной тактикой по сравнению с контрольной группой - 30 против 16,2%. Частота рождения крупных плодов и детей с признаками переношенности встречались чаще в группе с выжидательной тактикой ведения (p&lt;0,05). Заключение. Использование преиндукции родов у женщин с тенденцией к перенашиванию беременности в сроке 284-285 дней является достаточно эффективным и безопасным методом профилактики осложнений, позволяет снизить частоту рождения переношенных детей, при этом не способствует увеличению частоты кесарева сечения и неблагоприятным перинатальным исходам.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>prolonged pregnancy</kwd><kwd>labor preinduction</kwd><kwd>mifepristone</kwd><kwd>dinoprostone</kwd><kwd>signs of neonatal postmaturity</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>переношенная беременность</kwd><kwd>преиндукция родов</kwd><kwd>мифепристон</kwd><kwd>динопростон</kwd><kwd>признаки переношенности новорожденного</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Kortekaas J.C., Kazemier B.M., Ravelli A.C., de Boer K., van Dillen J., Mol B., de Miranda E. Recurrence rate and outcome of postterm pregnancy, a national cohort study. Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2015; 193: 70-4. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.05.021.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Vayssière C., Haumonte J.B., Chantry A., Coatleven F., Debord M.P., Gomez C. et al.; French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF). Prolonged and post-term pregnancies: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF). Eur. J. Obstet. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2013; 169(1): 10-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.01.026.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Bodner-Adler B., Bodner K., Pateisky N., Kimberger O., Chalubinski K., Mayerhofer K., Husslein P. Influence of labor induction on obstetric outcomes in patients with prolonged pregnancy: a comparison between elective labor induction and spontaneous onset of labor beyond term. Wien. Klin. Wochenschr. 2005; 117(7-8): 287-92.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Alexander J.M., McIntire D.D., Leveno K.J. Forty weeks and beyond: pregnancy outcomes by week of gestation. Obstet. Gynecol. 2000; 96(2): 291-4.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Brouwers H.A., Bruins H.W., van Huis A.M., de Miranda E., Ravelli A.C.J., Tamminga P: PRN Non-published Data. The Netherlands: Perinatal Registration Netherlands (PRN); 2013.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Wang M., Fontaine P. Common questions about late-term and postterm pregnancy. Am. Fam. Physician. 2014; 90(3): 160-5.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Chantry A.A., Lopez E. Fetal and neonatal complications related to prolonged pregnancy. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Biol. Reprod. (Paris). 2011; 40(8): 717-25. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2011.09.007.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Gülmezoglu A.M., Crowther C.A., Middleton P., Heatley E. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2012; (6): CD004945. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub3.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Norwitz E.R., Snegovskikh V.V., Caughey A.B. Prolonged pregnancy: when should we intervene? Clin. Obstet. Gynecol. 2007; 50(2): 547-57.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Heimstad R., Skogvoll E., Mattsson L.A., Johansen O.J., Eik-Nes S.H., Salvesen K.A. Induction of labor or serial antenatal fetal monitoring in postterm pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet. Gynecol. 2007; 109(3): 609-17.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Locatelli A., Vergani P., Toso L., Verderio M., Pezzullo J.C., Ghidini A. Perinatal outcome associated with oligohydramnios in uncomplicated term pregnancies. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 2004; 269(2): 130-3.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Galal M., Symonds I., Murray H., Petraglia F., Smith R. Postterm pregnancy. Facts Views Vis. Obgyn. 2012; 4(3): 175-87.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>Hapangama D., Neilson J.P. Mifepristone for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2009; (3): CD002865. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002865. pub2.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Gallot D., de Lapasse C., Houlle C., Sapin V., Laurichesse-Delmas H., Saulnier J.P. et al. Obstetrical prognosis of labour induction with mifepristone after 41 weeks of gestation. Gynecol. Obstet. Fertil. 2004; 32(9): 708-12.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>McGill J., Shetty A. Mifepristone and misoprostol in the induction of labor at term. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2007; 96(2): 80-4.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Boulvain M., Kelly A., Irion O. Intracervical prostaglandins for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2008; (1): CD006971. doi: 10.1002/14651858. CD006971.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Thomas J., Fairclough A., Kavanagh J., Kelly A.J. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2014; (6): CD003101. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003101.pub3.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>Баев О.Р., Румянцева В.П. Мифепристон в преиндукции и индукции родов. Фарматека. 2011; 13: 75-9. [Baev O.R., Rumyantseva V.P. Mifepristone in preinduction and induction of labor. Farmateka. 2011; 13: 75-9. (in Russian)]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>Yelikar K., Deshpande S., Deshpande R., Lone D. Safety and efficacy of oral mifepristone in pre-induction cervical ripening and induction of labour in prolonged pregnancy. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. India. 2015; 65(4): 221-5. doi: 10.1007/s13224-014-0584-6.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>Петрухин В.А., Коваленко Т.С., Ахвледиани К.Н., Капустина М.В., Магилевская Е.В. Опыт применения мифепристона с целью медикаментозной подготовки шейки матки к родам. Медицинский совет. 2013; 8: 44-7. [Petruhin V.A., Kovalenko T.S., Ahvlediani K.N., Kapustina M.V., Magilevskaya E.V. Experience in the use of mifepristone for the purpose of medical cervical preparation for childbirth. Meditsinskiy sovet. 2013; 8: 44-7. (in Russian)]</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>Баев О.Р., Румянцева В.П., Бурдули Г.М., Полянчикова О.Л., Рубцова С.В. Прогностические факторы эффективности мифепристона в подготовке к родам. Акушерство и гинекология. 2011; 8: 91-4. [Bayev O.R., Rumyantseva V.P., Burduli G.M., Polyanchikova O.L., Rubtsova S.V. Prognostic factors for the efficacy of mifepristone in preparation for labor. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya/Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2011; 8: 91-4. (in Russian)]</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
