# Interesting Research on why inductions result in c-secs for diabetics!



## Babysaurus (Apr 25, 2012)

*Interesting Research on why inductions often result in c-secs for diabetics!*

As I am coming up to 33 weeks the fact that I am actually going to have to give birth one way or another is becoming increasingly real!

As some of you may have worked out, I have been questioning the stats I was given by the consultant obs a month ago about diabetic inductions having a "60 to 70% chance" of not progressing properly and so going to c-section anyway. This has turned what I intially hoped for on it's head as previously I wanted to avoid a section as much as one can with these things, but as it now looks more likely than not it has put things in a whole different light - the worst case scenario would now be a c-sec after several days of failed induction or similar.

So, I wanted to find out precisely why so many diabetics end up with a section in the end regardless of the various attempts, and have come across some interesting research from the British Medical Journal which states that diabetic mothers generally have much weaker contractions due to being diabetic. This is even with strong doses of oxytocin or other hormones given over a long (or short!) period of time. The uterus will contract a lot weaker than it would with other women and also for shorter amounts of time, hence 'failiure to progress.'

I had another scan and apt with the obs today and asked about the links between c-secs etc and was told that the reason the inductions often don't work was due to the baby being early and / or the baby becoming distressed or the mother getting too tired. Neither obs I spoke to was aware of this research until I showed it to them (its a recent study, 2010.)

Obviously, not every single diabetic is likely to have problems but it is a significant factor in why an induction is unlikely to work, even if we go further than 40 weeks.

I cannot post a link to it, but if you private message me with your email address I can send you the info.


----------



## Lula (Apr 26, 2012)

How interesting. I often wonder about this. I'm not planning kids just yet but this is something I often think about as it strikes me that so many people with Type 1 end up having sections, and I sometimes think that when my time comes I might just prefer to go for an elective c-section (if I'm allowed to).

I will pm you my email as I'd love to see the research.


----------



## Babysaurus (Apr 27, 2012)

Hi Lula, 
I previously assumed that it was due to being 38 weeks rather than later, but this has disproved it. Its not a 'given' that all diabetics will have weaker uterine contractions, but it does seem to be the majority. I was also quite amazed that the obs I showed the print out to had no idea (I was naughty and asked them if diabetics were less likely to respond to the drugs than non diabetics and was told that this was 'certainly' not the case.) Admittedly it is new research, but not _that_ new (2010)! 

Due to this, I have discussed things more with the obs and we are, all being well (am 33 weeks now so things have time to change) going to try an induction but with a very early cut off point (12 or 24 hours, depending.) The chances are high of things not progressing, although we won't know for sure until we try, and due to this I don't want to risk the 3 / 4 days in labour and then ending up with a section after all when exhausted.


----------



## Lula (Apr 27, 2012)

Thanks for sharing this information. Definitely something to think over! Sounds as if you have considered this carefully from all angles, so best of luck for  simple and straightforward delivery. I haven't been on the boards for a while so have only just seen all the stuff you've been through with prescriptions etc. I hope that's all resolved now and you're not getting any more hassle. Sounds like being a pregnant type 1 is a full time job!
Take care!


----------



## PhoebeC (Apr 27, 2012)

Very interesting. And it does make more sense with why we have such a hard time with slow labours.

I wish they would make more about this rather than the big baby thing.

Was all i was ever told.

xx


----------



## Pigeon (Nov 12, 2019)

Hello, I appreciate this is an old thread, but can anyone give me more details on this study, e.g. author, so I can look it up? I had a 32 week scan today and the consultant has thrown me by suddenly talking about being induced - all the way through they have talked about a C section as I have 2 large fibroids on the cervix, so the C section reason was unrelated to diabetes. Then today he announced that the fibroids might shrink or move and they'll assess at another scan at 35 weeks, which is getting a bit close! I haven't gone to any ante-natal classes about natural birth as I was led to believe it wasn't an option!

So I don't want to be induced then end up with an emergency C section anyway, so I am doing my research on diabetes and fibroids and induction levels of success. It seems as though reading on here most T1 people end up with a  C section anyway so if there are 2 reasons for induction to be likely to fail for me I'd like to go for a C Section from the start. If anyone has more details of this study I'd like to look it up.

Thanks,

Pigeon


----------

