The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians · 2019
Foley catheter versus cervical double balloon for labor induction: a prospective randomized study.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Solt Ido, Frank Wolf Maya, Ben-Haroush Shani, Kaminskyi Svetlana, Ophir Ella, Bornstein Jacob
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Cervical ripening by mechanical methods enhances labor induction success. We compared Cervical Ripening Double Balloon catheter (CRDB) to Foley catheter.
STUDY DESIGN: This prospective blind study randomized 85 nulliparas and 95 multiparas to labor induction by either Foley catheter or CRDB. Primary outcomes were Bishop score increment, time from catheter withdrawal to delivery, and cesarean section rate.
RESULTS: In multiparas, mean Bishop score increment between pre- and post-catheter was significantly higher in the CRDB catheter than in the Foley group (4.4 ± 1.9 and 3.4 ± 2.0, respectively, p = .02). Mean interval from catheter withdrawal to delivery was shorter in the CRDB catheter (14.6 ± 12.3 and 8.6 ± 5.4) than in the Foley catheter group (22.6 ± 27.2 and 13.9 ± 17.7), in both nulliparas and multiparas (p = .05 and p = .03, respectively). In nulliparas, no statistically significant differences were found in mean Bishop score increment between the two catheters, but cesarean section rate was higher in the Foley group than the CRDB group (46.5% and 20%, respectively, p = .02).
CONCLUSION: Bishop score increment by CRDB catheter is more effective than induction by Foley catheter in multiparas. CRDB catheter is associated with decreased time to delivery in both nulliparas and multiparas and a lower cesarean section rate in nulliparas. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00501033.
STUDY DESIGN: This prospective blind study randomized 85 nulliparas and 95 multiparas to labor induction by either Foley catheter or CRDB. Primary outcomes were Bishop score increment, time from catheter withdrawal to delivery, and cesarean section rate.
RESULTS: In multiparas, mean Bishop score increment between pre- and post-catheter was significantly higher in the CRDB catheter than in the Foley group (4.4 ± 1.9 and 3.4 ± 2.0, respectively, p = .02). Mean interval from catheter withdrawal to delivery was shorter in the CRDB catheter (14.6 ± 12.3 and 8.6 ± 5.4) than in the Foley catheter group (22.6 ± 27.2 and 13.9 ± 17.7), in both nulliparas and multiparas (p = .05 and p = .03, respectively). In nulliparas, no statistically significant differences were found in mean Bishop score increment between the two catheters, but cesarean section rate was higher in the Foley group than the CRDB group (46.5% and 20%, respectively, p = .02).
CONCLUSION: Bishop score increment by CRDB catheter is more effective than induction by Foley catheter in multiparas. CRDB catheter is associated with decreased time to delivery in both nulliparas and multiparas and a lower cesarean section rate in nulliparas. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00501033.