Do mechanical methods of cervical ripening increase infectious morbidity? A systematic review

被引:98
作者
Heinemann, Jennifer [1 ]
Gillen, Geoff [1 ]
Sanchez-Ramos, Luis [1 ]
Kaunitz, Andrew M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florida, Hlth Sci Ctr Jacksonville, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA
关键词
cervical ripening; infection; mechanical method;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajog.2008.05.005
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
The purpose of this study was to review systematically randomized controlled trials that were associated with cervical ripening. We identified randomized controlled trials that compared the use of Foley catheter, with or without extraamniotic saline solution infusion, Laminaria, or hygroscopic dilators for cervical ripening or induction with pharmacologic agents or placebo. Randomized controlled trials that evaluated maternal or neonatal infection were selected. The outcomes that were assessed were maternal and neonatal infection, chorioamnionitis, and endomyometritis. Thirty studies met inclusion criteria. Compared with the use of pharmacologic methods alone, patients who underwent cervical ripening with mechanical agents had a significantly higher rate of maternal infection rates. Similar results were noted for patients who underwent ripening with Foley catheter alone in comparison with pharmacologic agents. No difference was noted in maternal infection rates for patients who underwent ripening with extraamniotic saline solution infusion, Laminaria, or hygroscopic dilators. Compared with the use of pharmacologic agents alone, maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity appears to be increased when mechanical agents are used for cervical ripening.
引用
收藏
页码:177 / 187
页数:11
相关论文
共 77 条
[1]   A randomized comparison of oral misoprostol versus Foley catheter and oxytocin for induction of labor at term [J].
Abramovici, D ;
Goldwasser, S ;
Mabie, BC ;
Mercer, BM ;
Goldwasser, R ;
Sibai, BM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1999, 181 (05) :1108-1112
[2]  
Adeniji O A, 2005, J Obstet Gynaecol, V25, P134
[3]   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
[4]  
Al-Taani M I, 2004, East Mediterr Health J, V10, P547
[5]  
Allouche C, 1993, Rev Fr Gynecol Obstet, V88, P492
[6]   A randomized comparison of prostaglandin E(2), oxytocin, and the double-balloon device in inducing labor [J].
Atad, J ;
Hallak, M ;
Auslender, R ;
PoratPacker, T ;
Zarfati, D ;
Abramovici, H .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 87 (02) :223-227
[7]  
ATAD J, 1991, OBSTET GYNECOL, V77, P146
[8]   Induction of labor with use of a Foley catheter and extraamniotic corticosteroids [J].
Barkai, G ;
Cohen, SB ;
Kees, S ;
Lusky, A ;
Margalit, V ;
Mashiach, S ;
Schiff, E .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 177 (05) :1145-1148
[9]   Cervical ripening and induction of labor with misoprostol, dinoprostone gel, and a Foley catheter: A randomized trial of 3 techniques [J].
Barrilleaux, PS ;
Bofill, JA ;
Terrone, DA ;
Magann, EF ;
May, WL ;
Morrison, JC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2002, 186 (06) :1124-1129
[10]  
Breslow N E, 1980, IARC Sci Publ, P5