nach oben

The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India

Erschienen in:

07.11.2017 | Original Article

Sequential Versus Concurrent Use of Vaginal Misoprostol Plus Foley Catheter for Induction of Labor: A Randomized Clinical Trial

verfasst von: Ibrahim Abd Elgafor El Sharkwy, Elsayed Hamdy Noureldin, Ekramy Abd Elmoneim Mohamed, Sherine Attia Shazly

Erschienen in: The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India | Ausgabe 5/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

To compare between the sequential and concurrent use of vaginal misoprostol plus Foley catheter for labor induction.

Methods

This single-center, non-blinded randomized study was conducted at the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of medicine, Zagazig University. A total of 160 women with full term singleton pregnancy, cephalic presentation and bishop score ≤ 6 were randomized for labor induction with either concurrent or sequential use of vaginal misoprostol plus Foley catheter (80 cases in each group). The primary outcome measured was induction-to-delivery interval and secondary outcomes mesaured were vaginal delivery within 24 h, number of doses needed to induce labor, need of oxytocin for augmentation of labor, cesarean section rate, maternal or neonatal complications.

Results

The mean induction-to-delivery interval was 22.33 ± 13.28 h versus 18.45 ± 14.34 h (p = 0.041) in sequential and concurrent group, respectively. The percentage of women who completed vaginal delivery within 24 h was 51% versus 61% (p = 0.046) in sequential and concurrent group, respectively. Other maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups

Conclusion

Concurrent use of vaginal misoprostol plus Foley catheter for labor induction was associated with shorter induction-to delivery interval compared to sequential use, and it increases the rate of vaginal delivery in the first 24 h.

Geeta K, Swamy MD. Current methods of labor induction. Semin Perinatol. 2012;36(5):348–52.CrossRef

Induction of Labor. Royal College of Obstetricians. and Gynaecologists. 2008: Available: http://www.rcog.org.uk. Accessed 2012 June 26.

Mozurkewich E, Chilimigras J, Koepke K, Keeton K, King VJ. Indications for induction of labor: a best-evidence review. BJOG. 2009;116(5):626–36.CrossRefPubMed

Gulmezoglu AM, Crowther CA, Middleton P, Healy E. Induction of labor for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; CD004945. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub3.

Jozwiak M, Bloemenkamp KW, Kelly AJ, Mol BW, Irion O, Boulvain M. Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;3:333.

Kehl S, Ehard A, Berlit S, Spaich S, Sutterlin M, Siemer J. Combination of misoprostol and mechanical dilation for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;159:315–9.CrossRefPubMed

Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Uccella S, Agosti M, Serati M, Marchitelli G, et al. A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207:125-e1.CrossRef

Adeniyi AA, Odukogbe AA, Olayemi A, Oladokun O, Adeniji AO, Aimakhu CO, et al. Randomization of two dosing regimens of vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction in a low resource setting. Niger J Clin Pract. 2014;17:287–91.CrossRefPubMed

Hill JB, Thigpen BD, Bofill JA, Magann E, Moore LE, Martin JN Jr. A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Perinatol. 2009;26:33–8.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Lanka S, Surapaneni T, Nirmalan PK. Concurrent use of Foley catheter and misoprostol for induction of labor: a randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2014;40:1527–33.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Ande AB, Ezeanochie CM, Olagbuji NB. Induction of labor in prolonged pregnancy with unfavorable cervix: comparison of sequential intracervical Foley catheter-intravaginal misoprostol and intravaginal misoprostol alone. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012;285:967–71.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Carbone JF, Tuuli MG, Fogertey PJ, Roehl KA, Macones GA. Combination of Foley bulb and vaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal misoprostol alone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121:247–52.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Hussein M. A comparison between vaginal misoprostol and a combination of misoprostol and Foley catheter for cervical ripening and labor induction in early third Trimester pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206:147.CrossRef

14.

Levine LD, Downes KL, Elovitz MA, Parry S, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. Mechanical and pharmacologic methods of labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;6:1357–64.CrossRef

15.

Kehl S, Ziegler J, Schleussner E, Tuschy B, Berlit S, Kirscht J, et al. Sequential use of double-balloon catheter and oral misoprostol versus oral misoprostol alone for induction of labor at term (CRB plus trial): a multicentre, open-label randomized controlled trial. BJOG. 2015;122:129–36.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Sequential Versus Concurrent Use of Vaginal Misoprostol Plus Foley Catheter for Induction of Labor: A Randomized Clinical Trial
verfasst von: Ibrahim Abd Elgafor El Sharkwy
Elsayed Hamdy Noureldin
Ekramy Abd Elmoneim Mohamed
Sherine Attia Shazly
Publikationsdatum: 07.11.2017
Verlag: Springer India
Erschienen in: The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India / Ausgabe 5/2018
Print ISSN: 0971-9202
Elektronische ISSN: 0975-6434
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-017-1059-3

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Sequential Versus Concurrent Use of Vaginal Misoprostol Plus Foley Catheter for Induction of Labor: A Randomized Clinical Trial