To investigate the influencing factors, efficacy and complications of ethacridine and its combination regimen during induction of labor in the second trimester.

A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 388 patients, who voluntarily underwent mid-pregnancy induced labor in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of our hospital from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019. According to different methods of induction, they were divided into single ethacridine group (252 cases) and combined ethacridine-mifepristone or misoprostol group (136 cases). Basic conditions, clinical efficacy, comorbidities and complications were compared in the two groups.

Compare in two different group, there were significant differences in history of cesarean section (26.47% vs 17.01%), in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) (7.35% vs 1.98%), multiple pregnancy (8.82% vs 3.57%), induction of labor due to fetal abnormalities (75.74% vs 62.70%), and the proportion of placental abnormalities (16.9% vs 9.1%). The time from medication to regular contractions (33.59±11.11) h vs (31.17±9.81) h and labor induction(11.57±10.91) h vs (8.18±7.86) h were significantly longer in a single group compared with combined group (P<0.05). However, the success rate of labor induction, uterine clearance rate, postpartum hemorrhage, postpartum fever and uterine rupture were not significantly (P>0.05).

Pregnant women with a history of cesarean section, in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer, multiple pregnancy and placental abnormalities are recommended to choose the combined method for induction of labor. The combined method can effectively shorten the time of induced labor, reduce postpartum complications, and benefit the physical and mental health of patients.