Introduction: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of early amniotomy, performed before the active phase of labor, versus late amniotomy, conducted during the active phase. Methods: Six data sources were screened until April 2024 for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Outcomes were pooled using risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) in fixed or random-effects models. Results: Sixteen RCTs involving 3,378 patients were included. Four RCTs had a low risk of bias, and 12 had some concerns. There was no significant difference in cesarean section rates (RR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.79, 1.27], p = 0.99) or normal vaginal delivery (RR = 1.01, 95% CI [0.93, 1.10], p = 0.81) between early and late amniotomy. However, early amniotomy reduced time-to-delivery by 2.42 h (95% CI: −3.06, −1.54, p < 0.0001) but increased the risk of chorioamnionitis (RR = 1.46, 95% CI [1.06, 2.01], p = 0.02). There was no difference in other maternal or neonatal outcomes, including endometritis, maternal fever, postpartum hemorrhage, cord prolapse, uterine hyperstimulation, APGAR score, neonatal sepsis, neonatal intensive care unit admission, or meconium-stained amniotic fluid. Conclusion: Early amniotomy significantly reduced time-to-delivery without increasing cesarean section rates but was associated with a higher risk of chorioamnionitis. Further research is needed to determine the optimal induction of labor protocol.

Journal Section:
Systematic Review
Keywords:
Induction of labor, Amniotomy, Cesarean section, Delivery, Meta-analysis
1.
Tsakiridis
I
,
Mamopoulos
A
,
Athanasiadis
A
,
Dagklis
T
.
Induction of labor: an overview of guidelines
.
Obstet Gynecol Surv
.
2020
;
75
(
1
):
61
–
72
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
2.
ACOG
.
Induction of labor
.
Practice Bulletin
;
2009
. Available from: https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-bulletin/articles/2009/08/induction-of-labor (accessed June 9, 2024).
3.
Asefa
D
,
Akessa
GM
,
Tolessa
DB
,
Abdulkadir
Y
.
Induction of labor prevalence and associated factors for its outcome at Wolliso St. Luke, Catholic Hospital, South West Shewa, Oromia
.
Intern Med Open Access
.
2017
;
7
(
5
):
1
–
7
.
Google Scholar
 
4.
Anter
ME
,
Elkader Shabbana
AA
,
Fatahlla Elhalaby
AE
,
Elshafy Abd Elfattah Youssif
HA
,
Elkhouly
NI
.
Impact of early versus late amniotomy on induction of labor in nulliparous women after vaginally administered misoprostol: a randomized clinical trial
.
Reprod Dev Med
.
2021
;
5
(
3
):
148
–
53
.
Google Scholar
 
5.
Parkes
I
,
Kabiri
D
,
Hants
Y
,
Ezra
Y
.
The indication for induction of labor impacts the risk of cesarean delivery
.
J Matern Neonatal Med
.
2016
;
29
(
2
):
224
–
8
.
Google Scholar
 
6.
Grobman
WA
,
Rice
MM
,
Reddy
UM
,
Tita
ATN
,
Silver
RM
,
Mallett
G
, et al.
Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women
.
N Engl J Med
.
2018
;
379
(
6
):
513
–
23
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
7.
Kim
SW
,
Nasioudis
D
,
Levine
LD
.
Role of early amniotomy with induced labor: a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM
.
2019
;
1
(
4
):
100052
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
8.
Berry
M
,
Lamiman
K
,
Slan
MN
,
Zhang
X
,
Arena Goncharov
DD
,
Hwang
YP
, et al.
Early vs delayed amniotomy following transcervical Foley balloon in the induction of labor: a randomized clinical trial
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol
.
2024
;
230
(
5
):
567.e1
–
1
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
9.
Smyth
RMD
,
Markham
C
,
Dowswell
T
.
Amniotomy for shortening spontaneous labour
.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
.
2013
;
2013
(
6
):
CD006167
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
10.
Ghafarzadeh
M
,
Moeininasab
S
,
Namdari
M
.
Effect of early amniotomy on dystocia risk and cesarean delivery in nulliparous women: a randomized clinical trial
.
Arch Gynecol Obstet
.
2015
;
292
(
2
):
321
–
5
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
11.
Jamaluddin
A
,
Azhary
JMK
,
Hong
JGS
,
Hamdan
M
,
Tan
PC
.
Early versus delayed amniotomy with immediate oxytocin after Foley catheter cervical ripening in multiparous women with labor induction: a randomized controlled trial
.
Int J Gynecol Obstet
.
2023
;
160
(
2
):
661
–
9
.
Google Scholar
 
12.
Slagle
HBG
,
Fonge
YN
,
Caplan
R
,
Pfeuti
CK
,
Sciscione
AC
,
Hoffman
MK
.
Early vs expectant artificial rupture of membranes following Foley catheter ripening: a randomized controlled trial
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol
.
2022
;
226
(
5
):
724.e1
–
9
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
13.
Hasan
NA
,
Hong
JGS
,
Teo
IH
,
Zaidi
SN
,
Hamdan
M
,
Tan
PC
.
Early versus delayed amniotomy with immediate oxytocin after Foley catheter cervical ripening in nulliparous labor induction: a randomized trial
.
Int J Gynecol Obstet
.
2022
;
159
(
3
):
951
–
60
.
Google Scholar
 
14.
MacOnes
GA
,
Cahill
A
,
Stamilio
DM
,
Odibo
AO
.
The efficacy of early amniotomy in nulliparous labor induction: a randomized controlled trial
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol
.
2012
;
207
(
5
):
403.e1
–
5
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
15.
Grobman
WA
,
Rice
MM
,
Reddy
UM
,
Tita
ATN
,
Silver
RM
,
Mallett
G
, et al.
Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women: editorial comment
.
Obstet Gynecol Surv
.
2019
;
74
(
1
):
7
–
9
.
Google Scholar
 
16.
Gagnon-Gervais
K
,
Bujold
E
,
Iglesias
M-H
,
Duperron
L
,
Masse
A
,
Mayrand
M-H
, et al.
Early versus late amniotomy for labour induction: a randomized controlled trial
.
J Matern Neonatal Med
.
2012
;
25
(
11
):
2326
–
9
.
Google Scholar
 
17.
Vadivelu
M
,
Rathore
S
,
Benjamin
SJ
,
Abraham
A
,
Belavendra
A
,
Mathews
JE
.
Randomized controlled trial of the effect of amniotomy on the duration of spontaneous labor
.
Int J Gynecol Obstet
.
2017
;
138
(
2
):
152
–
7
.
Google Scholar
 
18.
Halouani
A
,
Masmoudi
Y
,
Hamdaoui
R
,
Hammami
A
,
Triki
A
,
Ben Amor
A
.
Early versus late amniotomy during induction of labor using oxytocin: a randomized controlled trial
.
PLoS One
.
2023
;
18
(
5
):
e0286037
–
11
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
19.
Ruamsap
K
,
Panichkul
P
.
The effect of early versus late amniotomy on the course of labor
.
J Med Assoc Thail
.
2017
;
100
(
2
):
125
–
32
.
Google Scholar
 
20.
Rasheed
F
,
Ahmed
A
,
Hussain
S
.
The impact of early versus late amniotomy on duration of labor, maternal and neonatal outcomes in Iraqi primigravida with spontaneous labor
.
Med Sci
.
2014
;
3
(
3
):
1343
–
51
.
Google Scholar
 
21.
Cammu
H
,
Van Eeckhout
E
.
A randomised controlled trial of early versus delayed use of amniotomy and oxytocin infusion in nulliparous labour
.
Br J Obstet Gynaecol
.
1996
;
103
(
4
):
313
–
8
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
22.
Bala
A
,
Bagga
R
,
Kalra
J
,
Dutta
S
.
Early versus delayed amniotomy during labor induction with oxytocin in women with bishop’s score of ≥6: a randomized trial
.
J Matern Neonatal Med
.
2018
;
31
(
22
):
2994
–
3001
.
Google Scholar
 
23.
Levy
R
,
Ferber
A
,
Ben-Arie
A
,
Paz
B
,
Hazan
Y
,
Blickstein
I
, et al.
A randomised comparison of early versus late amniotomy following cervical ripening with a Foley catheter
.
BJOG
.
2002
;
109
(
2
):
168
–
72
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
24.
Mercer
BM
,
McNanley
T
,
O’Brien
JM
,
Randal
L
,
Sibai
BM
.
Early versus late amniotomy for labor induction: a randomized trial
.
Am J Obstet Gynecol
.
1995
;
173
(
4
):
1321
–
5
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
25.
De Vivo
V
,
Carbone
L
,
Saccone
G
,
Magoga
G
,
De Vivo
G
,
Locci
M
, et al.
Early amniotomy after cervical ripening for induction of labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
.
Obstet Gynecol Surv
.
2020
;
75
(
9
):
527
–
9
.
Google Scholar
 
26.
Page
MJ
,
McKenzie
JE
,
Bossuyt
PM
,
Boutron
I
,
Hoffmann
TC
,
Mulrow
CD
, et al.
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
.
Syst Rev
.
2021
;
10
(
1
):
89
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
27.
Higgins
JPT
,
Thomas
J
,
Chandler
J
,
Cumpston
M
,
Li
T
,
Page
MJ
, et al, editors.
Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions
;
2023
.
Google Scholar
 
28.
Sterne
JAC
,
Savović
J
,
Page
MJ
,
Elbers
RG
,
Blencowe
NS
,
Boutron
I
, et al.
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
.
BMJ
.
2019
;
366
:
l4898
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
29.
Guyatt
GH
,
Oxman
AD
,
Kunz
R
,
Vist
GE
,
Falck-Ytter
Y
,
Schünemann
HJ
, et al.
What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians
.
BMJ Br Med J
.
2008
;
336
(
7651
):
995
–
8
.
Google Scholar
 
30.
Guyatt
GH
,
Oxman
AD
,
Vist
GE
,
Kunz
R
,
Falck-Ytter
Y
,
Alonso-Coello
P
, et al.
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
.
BMJ Br Med J
.
2008
;
336
(
7650
):
924
–
6
.
Google Scholar
 
31.
Wan
X
,
Wang
W
,
Liu
J
,
Tong
T
.
Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range
.
BMC Med Res Methodol
.
2014
;
14
:
135
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
32.
Lin
L
,
Chu
H
.
Quantifying publication bias in meta-analysis
.
Biometrics
.
2018
;
74
(
3
):
785
–
94
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
33.
Lothian
JA
.
Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery: ACOG and SMFM change the game
.
J Perinat Educ
.
2014
;
23
(
3
):
115
–
8
.
Google Scholar
 
34.
World Health Organization
.
WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience
;
2018
. p.
200
.
35.
de Vaan
MDT
,
Ten Eikelder
ML
,
Jozwiak
M
,
Palmer
KR
,
Davies-Tuck
M
,
Bloemenkamp
KW
, et al.
Mechanical methods for induction of labour
.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
.
2019
;
2019
(
10
):
CD001233
.
Google Scholar
 
36.
Kamijo
K
,
Banno
M
,
Morio
K
.
High-dose compared with standard-dose oxytocin regimens to augment labor in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial
.
Obstet Gynecol
.
2021
;
138
(
2
):
308
–
9
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
37.
Cahill
AG
,
Duffy
CR
,
Odibo
AO
,
Roehl
KA
,
Zhao
Q
,
MacOnes
GA
.
Number of cervical examinations and risk of intrapartum maternal fever
.
Obstet Gynecol
.
2012
;
119
(
6
):
1096
–
101
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
38.
Saccone
G
,
Ciardulli
A
,
Baxter
JK
,
Quiñones
JN
,
Diven
LC
,
Pinar
B
, et al.
Discontinuing oxytocin infusion in the active phase of labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis
.
Obstet Gynecol
.
2017
;
130
(
5
):
1090
–
6
.
Google Scholar
PubMed
 
39.
Imran
M
,
Kamran
A
,
Fakih
N
,
Afyouni
A
,
Naguib
MM
,
Saleh
AO
, et al.
Intravenous fluid rate of 250 mL/h versus 125 mL/h in nulliparous women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
.
Int J Gynecol Obstet
.
2023
;
165
(
2
):
621
–
33
.
Google Scholar
 
© 2025 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2025
You do not currently have access to this content.