Literature DB >> 29215519

Foley Plus Oxytocin Compared With Oxytocin for Induction After Membrane Rupture: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

A Dhanya Mackeen1, Danielle E Durie, Monique Lin, Christopher K Huls, Emma Qureshey, Michael J Paglia, Haiyan Sun, Anthony Sciscione.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of a transcervical Foley catheter plus oxytocin infusion compared with oxytocin infusion alone for labor induction and cervical ripening in women 34 weeks of gestation or greater with prelabor rupture of membranes.
METHODS: This is a randomized, multicenter trial of women with a live, singleton gestation at 34 weeks of gestation or greater with prelabor rupture of membranes, an unfavorable cervical examination (less than or equal to 2 cm dilated and less than or equal to 80% effaced), and no contraindication to labor. Participants were randomly allocated to a transcervical Foley catheter inflated to 30 cc with concurrent oxytocin infusion or oxytocin infusion alone. Oxytocin administration was standardized across sites. The primary study outcome was interval from induction to delivery. To detect a 2.5-hour difference in the interval from induction to delivery, we required outcome data on 194 women, assuming 80% power and a two-tailed α of 5%. Analysis was by intent to treat.
RESULTS: We enrolled 201 women: 93 were allocated to Foley and 108 to oxytocin. Demographics were similar between the groups. Time to delivery was not significantly different between groups: in the Foley group, it was 13.9 hours (±6.9 SD) compared with 14.4 hours (±7.9 SD) in the oxytocin group (P=.69). There were more cases of clinical chorioamnionitis (8% compared with 0%, P<.01) in the Foley group compared with the oxytocin group. There were no differences for other infectious morbidities or any other variable studied.
CONCLUSION: In patients with prelabor rupture of membranes, the use of a transcervical Foley catheter in addition to oxytocin does not shorten the time to delivery compared with oxytocin alone, but may increase the incidence of intraamniotic infection. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01973036.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29215519     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  6 in total

1.  Intracervical double-balloon catheter versus dinoprostone for cervical ripening in labor induction in pregnancies with a high risk of uterine hyperstimulation.

Authors:  Javier Vega Cañadas; María Teulón González; Natalia Pagola Limón; María Sanz Alguacil; María García-Luján Prieto; Rocío Canete Riaza; Rosa Montero-Macías
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 2.344

2.  Induction of labour in case of premature rupture of membranes at term with an unfavourable cervix: protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing double balloon catheter (+oxytocin) and vaginal prostaglandin (RUBAPRO) treatments.

Authors:  Eric Devillard; Amélie Delabaere; Marion Rouzaire; Bruno Pereira; Marie Accoceberry; Céline Houlle; Lydie Dejou-Bouillet; Pamela Bouchet; Denis Gallot
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 3.  Recent advances in the induction of labor.

Authors:  Anna Maria Marconi
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2019-10-30

Review 4.  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

5.  Clinical Insights for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction Using Prostaglandins.

Authors:  Stephanie Pierce; Ronan Bakker; Dean A Myers; Rodney K Edwards
Journal:  AJP Rep       Date:  2018-10-29

6.  Double Balloon Catheter (Plus Oxytocin) versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert for Term Rupture of Membranes: A Randomized Controlled Trial (RUBAPRO).

Authors:  Eric Devillard; Fanny Petillon; Marion Rouzaire; Bruno Pereira; Marie Accoceberry; Céline Houlle; Lydie Dejou-Bouillet; Pamela Bouchet; Amélie Delabaere; Denis Gallot
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.241

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.