Rodney K Edwards1, Michelle L Norris1, Mitchell D West2, Christina Zornes1, Katherine A Loeffler3, Jennifer D Peck3. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Oklahoma College of Medicine, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana. 3. School of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of study is to compare, in a pilot study, combined dinoprostone vaginal insert and Foley catheter (DVI + Foley) with Foley alone (Foley) for cervical ripening and labor induction at term. STUDY DESIGN: In this open-label pilot randomized controlled trial, women not in labor, with intact membranes, no prior uterine incision, an unfavorable cervix, gestational age ≥37 weeks, and a live, nonanomalous singleton fetus in cephalic presentation were randomly assigned, stratified by parity, to DVI + Foley or Foley. Oxytocin was used in both groups after cervical ripening. Primary outcome was time to vaginal delivery. RESULTS: From April 2017 to January 2018, 100 women were randomized. Median (25-75th percentile) time to vaginal delivery for nulliparous women was 21.2 (16.6-38.0) hours with DVI + Foley (n = 26) compared with 31.3 (23.3-46.9) hours with Foley (n = 24) (Wilcoxon p = 0.05). Median time to vaginal delivery for parous women was 17.1 (13.6-21.9) hours with DVI + Foley (n = 25) compared with 14.8 (12.7-19.5) hours with Foley (n = 25) (Wilcoxon p = 0.21). Results were also analyzed to consider the competing risk of cesarean using cumulative incidence functions. CONCLUSION: Compared with Foley alone, combined use of the dinoprostone vaginal insert and Foley for cervical ripening may shorten time to vaginal delivery for nulliparous but not parous women. Thieme. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of study is to compare, in a pilot study, combined dinoprostone vaginal insert and Foley catheter (DVI + Foley) with Foley alone (Foley) for cervical ripening and labor induction at term. STUDY DESIGN: In this open-label pilot randomized controlled trial, women not in labor, with intact membranes, no prior uterine incision, an unfavorable cervix, gestational age ≥37 weeks, and a live, nonanomalous singleton fetus in cephalic presentation were randomly assigned, stratified by parity, to DVI + Foley or Foley. Oxytocin was used in both groups after cervical ripening. Primary outcome was time to vaginal delivery. RESULTS: From April 2017 to January 2018, 100 women were randomized. Median (25-75th percentile) time to vaginal delivery for nulliparous women was 21.2 (16.6-38.0) hours with DVI + Foley (n = 26) compared with 31.3 (23.3-46.9) hours with Foley (n = 24) (Wilcoxon p = 0.05). Median time to vaginal delivery for parous women was 17.1 (13.6-21.9) hours with DVI + Foley (n = 25) compared with 14.8 (12.7-19.5) hours with Foley (n = 25) (Wilcoxon p = 0.21). Results were also analyzed to consider the competing risk of cesarean using cumulative incidence functions. CONCLUSION: Compared with Foley alone, combined use of the dinoprostone vaginal insert and Foley for cervical ripening may shorten time to vaginal delivery for nulliparous but not parous women. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Authors: Ravi Varadhan; Carlos O Weiss; Jodi B Segal; Albert W Wu; Daniel Scharfstein; Cynthia Boyd Journal: Med Care Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Lisa D Levine; Katheryne L Downes; Michal A Elovitz; Samuel Parry; Mary D Sammel; Sindhu K Srinivas Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: William A Grobman; Madeline M Rice; Uma M Reddy; Alan T N Tita; Robert M Silver; Gail Mallett; Kim Hill; Elizabeth A Thom; Yasser Y El-Sayed; Annette Perez-Delboy; Dwight J Rouse; George R Saade; Kim A Boggess; Suneet P Chauhan; Jay D Iams; Edward K Chien; Brian M Casey; Ronald S Gibbs; Sindhu K Srinivas; Geeta K Swamy; Hyagriv N Simhan; George A Macones Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-08-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeanine F Carbone; Methodius G Tuuli; Patricia J Fogertey; Kimberly A Roehl; George A Macones Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Olusola P Aduloju; Akinyemi A Akintayo; Abiodun I Adanikin; Idowu P Ade-Ojo Journal: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 2.100