Labor induction with a combined method (pharmacologic and mechanical): A randomized controlled trial

被引:2
作者
Polonia-Valente, Rita [1 ]
Costa, Susana [1 ]
Coimbra, Carolina [1 ]
Xavier, Joana [1 ]
Figueiredo, Rita [1 ]
Ferraz, Tiago [2 ,3 ]
Machado, Ana Paula [1 ]
Moucho, Marina [1 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Hosp Univ Sao Joao, Dept Obstet, Porto, Portugal
[2] Univ Porto FMUP, Fac Med Porto, Porto, Portugal
[3] Mediclin Al Murjan Hosp, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
关键词
Induction of labor; Combined methods; Cervical Foley; Misoprostol; Time to delivery; VAGINAL MISOPROSTOL; COMBINATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.jogoh.2023.102649
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a combined misoprostol-Foley catheter induction of labor protocol against the current guidelines of our department. Material and methods: A randomized trial was conducted comparing two cervical ripening study groups: combined misoprostol-cervical Foley and the current department practice (misoprostol alone or dinoprostone alone). Women were stratified randomly according to parity for the two intervention groups. The primary outcome was defined as time to delivery (in hours). Secondary outcomes were cesarean delivery rate, time to active labor (defined as dilatation 6 cm or greater), delivery within 12 h, delivery within 24 h, maternal length of stay and indication for cesarean delivery. A composite of maternal morbidity and neonatal morbidity were also analyzed. Results: 142 women were randomized into one of the two groups (74 for treatment group and 68 for control group). Demographic and clinical characteristics were similar among the two groups. The primary outcome, the average time to delivery, was faster in the treatment group (22.7 h vs 27.2 h, p = 0.03) and this difference was higher in the nulliparous subgroup (24.2 h vs 29.2 h, p = 0.03). Active phase of labor was achieved faster in the treatment group (17.9 h vs 22.7 h, p = 0.008). The risk for cesarean section was similar in both groups (OR 0.801 (0.527-1.217) vs OR 1.203 (0.871-1.662), p = 0.278). Conclusions: Our study suggests that the combined method of cervical Foley with vaginal misoprostol for women presenting to induction of labor with unfavorable Bishop scores reduces time to delivery safely. The risk for cesarean section was similar in both groups.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]   FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: Cardiotocography [J].
Ayres-de-Campos, Diogo ;
Spong, Catherine Y. ;
Chandraharan, Edwin .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2015, 131 (01) :13-24
[2]   Combination of Foley Bulb and Vaginal Misoprostol Compared With Vaginal Misoprostol Alone for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction A Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Carbone, Jeanine F. ;
Tuuli, Methodius G. ;
Fogertey, Patricia J. ;
Roehl, Kimberly A. ;
Macones, George A. .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 121 (02) :247-252
[3]   A prospective randomized controlled trial that compared misoprostol, Foley catheter, and combination misoprostol-Foley catheter for labor induction [J].
Chung, JH ;
Huang, WH ;
Rumney, PJ ;
Garite, TJ ;
Nageotte, MP .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 189 (04) :1031-1035
[4]   A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Vaginal Misoprostol versus Cervical Foley Plus Oral Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction [J].
Hill, James B. ;
Thigpen, Brad D. ;
Bofill, James A. ;
Magann, Everett ;
Moore, Lisa E. ;
Martin, James N., Jr. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2009, 26 (01) :33-38
[5]   Mechanical methods for induction of labour [J].
Jozwiak, Marta ;
Bloemenkamp, Kitty W. M. ;
Kelly, Anthony J. ;
Mol, Ben Willem J. ;
Irion, Olivier ;
Boulvain, Michel .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2012, (03)
[6]   Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour [J].
Kerr, Robbie S. ;
Kumar, Nimisha ;
Williams, Myfanwy J. ;
Cuthbert, Anna ;
Aflaifel, Nasreen ;
Haas, David M. ;
Weeks, Andrew D. .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2021, (06)
[7]  
Levine MD, 2016, Obstet Gynecol., V0, P1
[8]   Misoprostol combined with cervical single or double balloon catheters versus misoprostol alone for labor induction of singleton pregnancies: a meta-analysis of randomized trials [J].
Ornat, Lia ;
Alonso-Ventura, Vanesa ;
Bueno-Notivol, Juan ;
Chedraui, Peter ;
Perez-Lopez, Faustino R. .
JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2020, 33 (20) :3453-3468
[9]   Labor Induction Techniques: Which Is the Best? [J].
Penfield, Christina A. ;
Wing, Deborah A. .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2017, 44 (04) :567-+
[10]  
Rust OA, 2001, J REPROD MED, V46, P899