Objective: To test the hypothesis that in pregnancies with a clinically suspected growth restricted foetus at term, induction of labour is as safe as expectant management, and does not lead to increased obstetrical interventions or perinatal morbidity.
Study design: In one obstetric centre, 33 women with a clinically suspected growth restricted foetus at term were randomly allocated after stratification for parity to either induction or to expectant management. Obstetric and neonatal outcome variables were compared.
Results: There was a lower gestational age at labour (median 38(0) weeks versus 40(1) weeks) with a corresponding tendency to lower birth weight (mean 2428 g versus 2651 g), and a reduced need for ante partum medical surveillance, in the induction group. No significant differences in obstetrical interventions (25% versus 24%) and neonatal morbidity rates (50% versus 35%) were found.
Conclusion: A larger multicenter study with a sufficient power and long-term follow-up to decide the best policy for the term growth restricted foetus is feasible.