Foley catheter balloon vs locally applied prostaglandins for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review and metaanalysis

被引:80
作者
Vaknin, Zvi [1 ]
Kurzweil, Yaffa
Sherman, Dan
机构
[1] Assaf Harofeh Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, IL-70300 Zerifin, Israel
关键词
cervical ripening; Foley catheter balloon; labor induction; prostaglandins; EXTRAAMNIOTIC SALINE INFUSION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; E-2; GEL; UNFAVORABLE CERVIX; INTRAVAGINAL MISOPROSTOL; OXYTOCIN; QUALITY; PESSARIES; STATEMENT; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2010.04.038
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
We performed a metaanalysis of publications comparing the efficacy and safety of cervical ripening and labor induction by Foley catheter balloon (FCB) vs locally applied prostaglandins (LAPG) in the third trimester of pregnancy. Twenty-seven randomized controlled trials (1966-2008; 3532 participants) were selected from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL searches. There was no significant difference between FCB and LAPG in cesarean delivery rates. LAPG had a significantly increased risk of excessive uterine activity (P = .001). FCB had a significantly higher risk of oxytocin induction/augmentation during labor (P = .0002). Cervical prostaglandin-E2 was less effective (P = .04), and vaginal prostaglandin-E1 bore a significantly higher risk of excessive uterine activity (P < .0001) and meconium staining (P = .04). We concluded that FCB and LAPG result in similar cesarean delivery rates, that FCB bears a higher risk of oxytocin use for labor induction and/or augmentation, and that LAPG carries a higher risk of contraction abnormalities.
引用
收藏
页码:418 / 429
页数:12
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
Adeniji O A, 2005, J Obstet Gynaecol, V25, P134
[2]   Intravaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labor [J].
Afolabi, BB ;
Oyeneyin, OL ;
Ogedengbe, OK .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2005, 89 (03) :263-267
[3]  
Al-Taani M I, 2004, East Mediterr Health J, V10, P547
[4]   The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: Explanation and elaboration [J].
Altman, DG ;
Schulz, KF ;
Moher, D ;
Egger, M ;
Davidoff, F ;
Elbourne, D ;
Gotzsche, PC ;
Lang, T .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2001, 134 (08) :663-694
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2001, COCHRANE DB SYST REV
[6]  
BISHOP EH, 1964, OBSTET GYNECOL, V24, P266
[7]   A randomized trial of misoprostol versus extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion with oxytocin for induction of labor [J].
Buccellato, CA ;
Stika, CS ;
Frederiksen, MC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2000, 182 (05) :1039-1044
[8]  
CALDER AA, 1974, J OBSTET GYN BR COMM, V81, P39
[9]   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
[10]   A randomized trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter with concurrent oxytocin for labor induction in nulliparous women [J].
Culver, J ;
Strauss, RA ;
Brody, S ;
Dorman, K ;
Timlin, S ;
McMahon, MJ .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2004, 21 (03) :139-146