Cesarean SectionFRENCH-ARRIVENCT04799912
Labor Induction in Low-risk Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation to Reduce Cesarean: A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management in France (FRENCH-ARRIVE)
A study testing Elective labor induction in people with Cesarean Section, run by University Hospital, Bordeaux at 1 site in France.
Trial summary
The recent ARRIVE trial conducted in United States of America in 2014-2017 demonstrates that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks for nulliparous women did result in a significantly lower frequency of cesarean delivery with no significant differences of adverse perinatal outcomes. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Cesarean Section
- What is being tested?
- Elective labor induction
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 4,200 participants
- Where
- 1 siteFrance
- Study dates
- 12 Apr 2021to Jun 2027
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Nulliparous women (i.e. no previous pregnancy beyond 20 weeks)
- With singleton gestation. Twin gestation reduced to singleton, either spontaneously or therapeutically, is not eligible unless the reduction occurred before 14 weeks project gestational age
- Gestational age at randomization between 37 weeks of gestation 0 day and 38 weeks of gestation 6 days inclusive based on the crown rump length measured at the first trimester ultrasound before 14 weeks of gestation and 0 day, as recommended in France
- Affiliated or beneficiary to a health security system
- Signed informed consent
Who cannot join
- Project gestational age at date of first ultrasound > 14 weeks
- Plan for induction of labor prior to 40 weeks 5 days
- Plan for cesarean delivery or contraindication to labor
- Breech presentation
- Multiple pregnancy
- Signs of labor (regular painful contractions with cervical change)
Show all 24Show fewer
- Fetal demise or known major fetal anomaly
- Heparin or low-molecular weight heparin during the current pregnancy
- Placenta previa, accreta, vasa previa
- Active vaginal bleeding greater than bloody show
- Ruptured membranes
- Cerclage in current pregnancy
- Known oligohydramnios, defined as Amniotic Fluid Index < 5 or Maximal Vertical Pocket < 2 cm
- Fetal growth restriction, defined as Estimated Fetal Weight < 10th percentile according to local curve
- Known HIV positivity because of modified delivery plan
- Major maternal medical illness associated with increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcome (for example, any diabetes mellitus, lupus, any hypertensive disorder, cardiac disease, renal insufficiency)
- Refusal of blood products
- Contraindication to oxytocin
- Participation in another interventional study that influences management of labor or delivery (labor induction, operative vaginal delivery, cesarean section, shoulder dystocia)
- Delivery planned elsewhere at a non-Network site
- History of myomectomy by laparotomy or laparoscopy
- Previous metroplasty for uterine malformation or Asherman syndrome
- Patient under legal protection
- Poor understanding of the French language
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Hugo Madar, MD contact
France1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
CHU de Bordeaux
Bordeaux
Loic Sentilhes, MD, PhD, +33556 79 55 79, loic.sentilhes@chu-bordeaux.fr
About this study
The recent ARRIVE trial conducted in United States of America in 2014-2017 demonstrates that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks for nulliparous women did result in a significantly lower frequency of cesarean delivery with no significant differences of adverse perinatal outcomes. But the expected benefits of elective labor induction at 39 weeks have to be confirmed in other settings outside US before considering routine induction of labor for all low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation worldwide.
Read the detailed description
The nadir of the neonatal risks seems to be at 39 weeks of gestation and there is an augmentation of maternal complications after 39 weeks. Nonetheless, planned induction of labor at 39 weeks was not encouraged in common practice due to a suspected higher risk of frequency cesarean delivery and other adverse maternal outcomes, especially among nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix, compared with expectant management. This suspected increased maternal morbidity especially the cesarean rate associated with the induction of labor was based on observational studies which suffer from methodological limitations or based on underpowered small randomized clinical trials.
A recent multicenter, randomized, controlled, unmasked trial conducted in United States of America in 2014-2017 (ARRIVE trial), provides new results with a high level of evidence. This trial conducted among 6,106 low-risk nulliparous women who were randomized, 3062 assigned to labor induction at 39 weeks 0 day to 39 weeks 4 days and 3,044 assigned to expectant management, demonstrates that induction of labor at 39 weeks did result in a trend but not significant lower frequency of the primary outcome - a composite adverse perinatal outcome - (relative risk [RR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.00), but did result in a significantly lower frequency of cesarean delivery (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.93).
Although the cesarean delivery rate was a secondary outcome of the study and the absence of any comparison for women's characteristics of those who were eligible and declined to participate and those who were randomized, the recommendations of the Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and numerous authors have already considered that induction of labor ≥ 39 weeks should be proposed in low-risk nulliparous women. In other words, on the basis mainly on the results of a secondary outcome from only one single randomized controlled trial, they have proposed to modify the management of the pregnant women who reach 39 weeks gestation (i.e. the large majority of the pregnant women) while until now induction of labor for those women was proposed only if abnormal medical condition occurred or beyond 41 weeks of gestation. Nevertheless, the findings of the ARRIVE trial are so important because the reduction of the cesarean rate is a worldwide goal and the elective induction of labor ≥ 39 weeks seems to be today the most effective way to achieve it. However, French context and obstetrical practices are different than USA, with a lower rate of cesarean. Women's characteristics are also different (i.e. lower body mass index in France). Consequently, the external validity of the ARRIVE trial needs to be confirmed. Moreover, in the ARRIVE trial, the labor management has to respect American recent guidelines with a longer duration of the latent phase and administration of oxytocin if needed for at least 12 hours after membrane rupture before deeming the induction a failure. A generalization of labor induction at 39 weeks without a strictly respect of the eligibility criteria or labor management could result to an increase of unexpected adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes.
Thus, the expected benefits of labor induction at 39 weeks have to be confirmed in other context, in particular in French settings with a lower cesarean rate than in USA by replicating the ARRIVE study conducting another randomized controlled trial for which the primary outcome will be the cesarean section rate.
This replication is crucial before leading to a such important change in daily practice that would be considering routine induction of labor for low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation and consequently modifying the organization of all maternity wards in order to achieve this policy.
In addition to the replication of the ARRIVE trial in a French context, a prospective observational cohort with 4,200 women is associated with this trial to identify a potential participant selection bias.
- Conditions
- Cesarean Section
- Being tested
- Elective labor induction
- Keywords
- Cesarean section, Labor induction, Expectant management, Low risk nulliparous women, Maternal morbidity, Neonatal morbidity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Elective labor inductionProcedure or surgery
Elective labor induction at 39 weeks of gestation
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Elective labor induction | Experimental | Elective labor induction via oxytocin between 39 weeks of gestation and 0 day and 39 weeks of gestation and 4 days for women with favorable cervix. Those with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 6) will first undergo cervical ripening (method left to the discretion of the practitioner) in conjunction with or followed by oxytocin stimulation unless a contraindication arises. Except for elective induction of labor between 39 weeks of gestation and 0 day and 39 weeks of gestation and 4 days, the obstetrical management will not be modified compared to routine obstetrical management. Receives: Procedure: Elective labor induction |
| Expectant management | No intervention | Standard follow-up visits until at least 41 weeks of gestation and 0 day without elective labor induction unless a medical indication is present. Antepartum fetal testing will be initiated no later than 41 weeks of gestation and 1 day according to policies at each center (according to the French guidelines). If still pregnant, all women will undergo induction since 41 weeks of gestation but no later than 42 weeks of gestation (according to the French guidelines) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Incidence of cesarean section
Incidence of cesarean section defined as a cesarean birth regardless of the indication from the time the woman is randomized
Measured: Day 1
Secondary outcomes (31)
Incidence of incisional extensions
Incidence of incisional extensions at cesarean section or cervical traumas
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of operative vaginal delivery
Incidence of operative vaginal delivery and indication
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of operative vaginal delivery for cesarean
Incidence of operative delivery defined by a cesarean delivery or an instrumental vaginal delivery
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of third or fourth degree perineal laceration
Incidence of third or fourth degree perineal laceration
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of chorioamnionitis
Incidence of chorioamnionitis, defined as a clinical diagnosis before delivery as: maternal fever (body temperature ≥ 38°C) with no alternative cause identified and at least one sign among the following: fetal tachycardia>160 bpm for ≥ 10min or purulent amniotic fluid from the cervical canal
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of postpartum hemorrhage
Incidence of postpartum hemorrhage defined similarly as Grobman et al. in ARRIVE trial as any of the following:
- Transfusion
- Non-elective hysterectomy
- Use of sulprostone
- Other surgical interventions such as uterine compression sutures, uterine artery ligation, embolization and hypogastric ligation, balloon tamponade
- Curettage
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of admission to intensive care unit
Incidence of admission to intensive care unit
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of maternal death
Incidence of maternal death
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of preeclampsia/gestational hypertension
Incidence of preeclampsia/gestational hypertension
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Maternal pain
Median patient-reported pain outcomes with a 10-point Likert scale
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Maternal satisfaction
Maternal satisfaction with a satisfaction questionnaire derived from the childbirth experience questionnaire and satisfaction questionnaire
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
interval from randomization to delivery
Median interval from randomization to delivery
Measured: Day 1
gestational age at delivery
Median gestational age at delivery
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of maternal postpartum infection
Incidence of maternal postpartum infection defined similarly as Grobman et al. in ARRIVE trial as any of the following:
- Clinical diagnosis of endometritis
- Wound reopened for hematoma, seroma, infection or other reasons
- Cellulitis requiring antibiotics
- Pneumonia
- Pyelonephritis
- Bacteremia unknown source
- Septic pelvic thrombosis
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of maternal venous thromboembolism
Incidence of maternal venous thromboembolism (deep venous thrombosis diagnosed using bilateral leg Doppler ultrasound or pulmonary embolism diagnosed using bilateral ventilation-perfusion lung scanning or computed tomographic pulmonary angiography)
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Cervical ripening and induction
Method used for cervical ripening and induction
Measured: Day 1-2
Incidence of composite of severe neonatal morbidity and perinatal mortality
Incidence of composite of severe neonatal morbidity and perinatal mortality (any one of the following):
- Antepartum, intrapartum, or neonatal death
- Intubation, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) for ventilation or cardiorespiratory support within first 72 hours
- Apgar ≤ 3 at 5 minutes
- Neonatal encephalopathy
- Seizures
- Sepsis (presence of a clinically ill infant in whom systemic infection is suspected with a positive blood, cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), or catheterized/suprapubic urine culture; or, in the absence of positive cultures, clinical evidence of cardiovascular collapse or an unequivocal X-ray confirming infection).
- Pneumonia confirmed by X-ray or positive blood culture.
- Meconium aspiration syndrome
- Birth trauma (bone fractures, brachial plexus palsy, other neurologic injury, retinal hemorrhage, facial nerve injury)
- Intracranial hemorrhage or subgaleal hemorrhage
- Hypotension requiring pressor support
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Mean birth weight
Mean birth weight, incidence of macrosomia > 4,000 g, incidence of large for date fetuses defined as > 90th percentile weight for gestational age
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of neonatal acidosis
Incidence of neonatal acidosis (defined by umbilical cord arterial pH < 7.00)
Measured: Day 1
Median duration of respiratory support
Median duration of respiratory support including ventilator, CPAP, HFNC
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of small for gestational age
Incidence of small for gestational age defined as < 5th and < 10th percentile weight for gestational age
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of cephalohematoma
Incidence of cephalohematoma
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of shoulder dystocia
Incidence of shoulder dystocia
Measured: Day 1
Incidence of neonatal transfusion
Incidence of neonatal transfusion of blood products or blood
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of hyperbilirubinemia
Incidence of hyperbilirubinemia requiring phototherapy or exchange transfusion
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of hypoglycemia
Incidence of hypoglycemia (glucose < 35 mg/L) requiring IV therapy
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of admission to neonatal intensive care unit
Incidence of admission to neonatal intensive care unit or intermediate care unit
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of epidural use
outcomes: Incidence of epidural use
Measured: Day 1
Median hours on the labor and delivery unit
Median hours on the labor and delivery unit
Measured: Day 1-2
Median maternal postpartum length of hospital stay
Median maternal postpartum length of hospital stay
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Median neonatal length of hospital stay
Median neonatal length of hospital stay
Measured: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted16 Mar 2021
- Study start12 Apr 2021
- Primary completionJun 2027 (estimated)
- Study completionJun 2027 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cesarean SectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Hospital, BordeauxThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Multicenter open randomized controlled trial with 2 parallel arms
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 4,200 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Bordeaux
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Ministry of Health, France
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04799912
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CHUBX 2019/58
- Acronym
- FRENCH-ARRIVE
- Status last verified
- Feb 2025
- First submitted
- 12 Mar 2021
- Last updated
- 11 Feb 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Madar H, Chretien JM, Bouchghoul H, Froeliger A, Bibes A, Lacoste C, Subtil D, Saulnier P, Sentilhes L; FRENCH-ARRIVE Study Group and the Groupe de Recherche en Obstetrique et Gynecologie (GROG). Study protocol FRENCH-ARRIVE: labor induction in low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation to reduce cesarean births: a randomized trial of induction versus expectant management in France. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2026 May 8;26(1):693. doi: 10.1186/s12884-026-09193-z.
PubMed 42098695
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Feb 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Labor Induction in Low-risk Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation to Reduce Cesarean: A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management in France (FRENCH-ARRIVE)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04799912
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FRENCH-ARRIVE / CHUBX 2019/58
- Conditions
- Cesarean Section
- Keywords
- Cesarean section, Labor induction, Expectant management, Low risk nulliparous women, Maternal morbidity, Neonatal morbidity
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 4,200 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, BordeauxUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Ministry of Health, France
- Study start
- 12 Apr 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jun 2027 (estimated)
- First posted
- 16 Mar 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The recent ARRIVE trial conducted in United States of America in 2014-2017 demonstrates that elective induction of labor at 39 weeks for nulliparous women did result in a significantly lower frequency of cesarean delivery with no significant differences of adverse perinatal outcomes. But the expected benefits of elective labor induction at 39 weeks have to be confirmed in other settings outside US before considering routine induction of labor for all low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation worldwide.
Detailed description
The nadir of the neonatal risks seems to be at 39 weeks of gestation and there is an augmentation of maternal complications after 39 weeks. Nonetheless, planned induction of labor at 39 weeks was not encouraged in common practice due to a suspected higher risk of frequency cesarean delivery and other adverse maternal outcomes, especially among nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix, compared with expectant management. This suspected increased maternal morbidity especially the cesarean rate associated with the induction of labor was based on observational studies which suffer from methodological limitations or based on underpowered small randomized clinical trials.
A recent multicenter, randomized, controlled, unmasked trial conducted in United States of America in 2014-2017 (ARRIVE trial), provides new results with a high level of evidence. This trial conducted among 6,106 low-risk nulliparous women who were randomized, 3062 assigned to labor induction at 39 weeks 0 day to 39 weeks 4 days and 3,044 assigned to expectant management, demonstrates that induction of labor at 39 weeks did result in a trend but not significant lower frequency of the primary outcome - a composite adverse perinatal outcome - (relative risk [RR] 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.00), but did result in a significantly lower frequency of cesarean delivery (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76-0.93).
Although the cesarean delivery rate was a secondary outcome of the study and the absence of any comparison for women's characteristics of those who were eligible and declined to participate and those who were randomized, the recommendations of the Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM), American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and numerous authors have already considered that induction of labor ≥ 39 weeks should be proposed in low-risk nulliparous women. In other words, on the basis mainly on the results of a secondary outcome from only one single randomized controlled trial, they have proposed to modify the management of the pregnant women who reach 39 weeks gestation (i.e. the large majority of the pregnant women) while until now induction of labor for those women was proposed only if abnormal medical condition occurred or beyond 41 weeks of gestation. Nevertheless, the findings of the ARRIVE trial are so important because the reduction of the cesarean rate is a worldwide goal and the elective induction of labor ≥ 39 weeks seems to be today the most effective way to achieve it. However, French context and obstetrical practices are different than USA, with a lower rate of cesarean. Women's characteristics are also different (i.e. lower body mass index in France). Consequently, the external validity of the ARRIVE trial needs to be confirmed. Moreover, in the ARRIVE trial, the labor management has to respect American recent guidelines with a longer duration of the latent phase and administration of oxytocin if needed for at least 12 hours after membrane rupture before deeming the induction a failure. A generalization of labor induction at 39 weeks without a strictly respect of the eligibility criteria or labor management could result to an increase of unexpected adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes.
Thus, the expected benefits of labor induction at 39 weeks have to be confirmed in other context, in particular in French settings with a lower cesarean rate than in USA by replicating the ARRIVE study conducting another randomized controlled trial for which the primary outcome will be the cesarean section rate.
This replication is crucial before leading to a such important change in daily practice that would be considering routine induction of labor for low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation and consequently modifying the organization of all maternity wards in order to achieve this policy.
In addition to the replication of the ARRIVE trial in a French context, a prospective observational cohort with 4,200 women is associated with this trial to identify a potential participant selection bias.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Multicenter open randomized controlled trial with 2 parallel arms
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Elective labor induction | Experimental | Procedure: Elective labor inductionElective labor induction via oxytocin between 39 weeks of gestation and 0 day and 39 weeks of gestation and 4 days for women with favorable cervix. Those with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 6) will first undergo cervical ripening (method left to the discretion of the practitioner) in conjunction with or followed by oxytocin stimulation unless a contraindication arises. Except for elective induction of labor between 39 weeks of gestation and 0 day and 39 weeks of gestation and 4 days, the obstetrical management will not be modified compared to routine obstetrical management. |
| Expectant management | No intervention | –Standard follow-up visits until at least 41 weeks of gestation and 0 day without elective labor induction unless a medical indication is present. Antepartum fetal testing will be initiated no later than 41 weeks of gestation and 1 day according to policies at each center (according to the French guidelines). If still pregnant, all women will undergo induction since 41 weeks of gestation but no later than 42 weeks of gestation (according to the French guidelines) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Nulliparous women (i.e. no previous pregnancy beyond 20 weeks)
- With singleton gestation. Twin gestation reduced to singleton, either spontaneously or therapeutically, is not eligible unless the reduction occurred before 14 weeks project gestational age
- Gestational age at randomization between 37 weeks of gestation 0 day and 38 weeks of gestation 6 days inclusive based on the crown rump length measured at the first trimester ultrasound before 14 weeks of gestation and 0 day, as recommended in France
- Affiliated or beneficiary to a health security system
Key exclusion criteria (24 listed)
- Project gestational age at date of first ultrasound > 14 weeks
- Plan for induction of labor prior to 40 weeks 5 days
- Plan for cesarean delivery or contraindication to labor
- Breech presentation
- Multiple pregnancy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Elective labor inductionElective labor induction at 39 weeks of gestation | Procedure or surgery | Elective labor induction |
Primary outcome
Incidence of cesarean section
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of cesarean section defined as a cesarean birth regardless of the indication from the time the woman is randomized
31 secondary outcomes
Incidence of incisional extensions
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of operative vaginal delivery
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of operative vaginal delivery for cesarean
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of third or fourth degree perineal laceration
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of chorioamnionitis
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of postpartum hemorrhage
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of admission to intensive care unit
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of maternal death
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of preeclampsia/gestational hypertension
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Maternal pain
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Maternal satisfaction
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
interval from randomization to delivery
Time frame: Day 1
gestational age at delivery
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of maternal postpartum infection
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of maternal venous thromboembolism
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Cervical ripening and induction
Time frame: Day 1-2
Incidence of composite of severe neonatal morbidity and perinatal mortality
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Mean birth weight
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of neonatal acidosis
Time frame: Day 1
Median duration of respiratory support
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of small for gestational age
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of cephalohematoma
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of shoulder dystocia
Time frame: Day 1
Incidence of neonatal transfusion
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of hyperbilirubinemia
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of hypoglycemia
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of admission to neonatal intensive care unit
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Incidence of epidural use
Time frame: Day 1
Median hours on the labor and delivery unit
Time frame: Day 1-2
Median maternal postpartum length of hospital stay
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Median neonatal length of hospital stay
Time frame: Hospital discharge (Day 3-5)
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Feb 2025.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 42098695Madar H, Chretien JM, Bouchghoul H, Froeliger A, Bibes A, Lacoste C, Subtil D, Saulnier P, Sentilhes L; FRENCH-ARRIVE Study Group and the Groupe de Recherche en Obstetrique et Gynecologie (GROG). Study protocol FRENCH-ARRIVE: labor induction in low-risk nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation to reduce cesarean births: a randomized trial of induction versus expectant management in France. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2026 May 8;26(1):693. doi: 10.1186/s12884-026-09193-z.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Cesarean Section
Not yet recruiting
Esketamine Combined With Transcutaneous Electrical Acupoint Stimulation on Postoperative Recovery Quality After Elective Cesarean Section
Cesarean Section (MeSH: D002585), Postoperative Pain After Cesarean Section
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Early Heart Rate Variability and Sleep and Quality of Recovery After Cesarean Delivery
Recovery of Function, Postoperative Period
Not yet recruiting
Virtual Reality for Anxiety and Birth Satisfaction During Elective Cesarean Section
Anxiety, Cesarean Section
RecruitingPhase 4
Adding Dexmedetomidine or Clonidine to Spinal Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery
Cesarean Delivery, Cesarean Delivery; Neuraxial Opioids
Recruiting
Reducing Chronic Pain Following Cesarean Delivery
Chronic Pain, Cesarean Section Complications
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Hugo Madar, MD contact
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Elective labor induction in people with Cesarean Section, run by University Hospital, Bordeaux at 1 site in France.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 24 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Feb 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in France. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Loic Sentilhes, MD, PhD (+33556795579, loic.sentilhes@chu-bordeaux.fr), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Incidence of cesarean section (time frame: Day 1). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04799912, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Feb 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.