Literature DB >> 21152844

[Cervical Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor: a randomized clinical trial].

Maria Virginia de Oliveira e Oliveira1, Priscilla Von Oberst, Guilherme Karam Corrêa Leite, Adalberto Aguemi, Grecy Kenj, Vera Denise de Toledo Leme, Nelson Sass.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of the Foley balloon with vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.
METHODS: Randomized clinical trial, not blind, conducted from January 2006 to January 2008. A total of 160 pregnant women with indication for induction of labor were included and divided into two groups, 80 for Foley and 80 for vaginal misoprostol. Inclusion criteria were: gestational age of 37 weeks or more, a live single fetus with cephalic presentation and a Bishop score of four or less. We excluded patients with a uterine scar, ruptured membranes, estimated fetal weight greater than 4000 g, placenta previa, chorioamnionitis and conditions that imposed the immediate termination of pregnancy. Statistical tests employed were Mann-Whitney, χ² test or Fisher's exact test, and p value was significant if less than 0.005.
RESULTS: Misoprostol triggered more frequently spontaneous delivery (50.0 versus 15.0% for Foley, p<0.001) and required less use of oxytocin (41.2 versus 76.2%), and this group presented more tachysystole (21.2 versus 5.0%). The Foley catheter caused more discomfort to the patient (28.7 versus 1.2%). There were no differences in the time required for development of the Bishop score (20.69 versus 21.36 hours), for triggering delivery (36.42 versus 29.57 hours) or in rates of cesarean delivery (51.2 versus 42.5%). There were no significant differences in perinatal performance, with similar rates of abnormal cardiotocography (20.0 versus 21.2%), presence of meconium (13.7 versus 17.5%) and need for neonatal intensive care unit (3.7 versus 6.2%).
CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Foley catheter was as effective as misoprostol for cervical ripening, but less effective in triggering spontaneous labor. Our results support the recommendation of its use for cervical ripening, especially in patients with cesarean scar.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21152844     DOI: 10.1590/s0100-72032010000700007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet        ISSN: 0100-7203


  3 in total

1.  Induction of labour with a Foley catheter or oral misoprostol at term: the PROBAAT-II study, a multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Mieke L G Ten Eikelder; Femke Neervoort; Katrien Oude Rengerink; Gert J van Baaren; Marta Jozwiak; Jan-Willem de Leeuw; Irene de Graaf; Maria G van Pampus; Maureen Franssen; Martijn Oudijk; Paulien van der Salm; Mallory Woiski; Paula Jm Pernet; A Hanneke Feitsma; Huib van Vliet; Martina Porath; Frans Roumen; Erik van Beek; Hans Versendaal; Marion Heres; Ben Willem J Mol; Kitty W M Bloemenkamp
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 2.  Mechanical methods for induction of labour.

Authors:  Marieke Dt de Vaan; Mieke Lg Ten Eikelder; Marta Jozwiak; Kirsten R Palmer; Miranda Davies-Tuck; Kitty Wm Bloemenkamp; Ben Willem J Mol; Michel Boulvain
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-10-18

3.  Sublingual Misoprostol versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening in women with preeclampsia or gestational hypertension: A randomized control trial.

Authors:  Sedigheh Ayati; Elahe Hasanzadeh; Leila Pourali; Mohammadtaghi Shakeri; Atiye Vatanchi
Journal:  Int J Reprod Biomed       Date:  2019-07-31
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.