Comparison of Efficacy of Pervaginal Misoprostol, Intracervical Foley Catheter, Intracervical Dinoprostone on Induction of Labor

Abstract

Introduction: Induction methods are many such as intravaginal misoprostol, intracervical Foley catheter, intracervical dinoprostone, etc. Presently, a very limited number of studies are available for comparing all three popular methods intravaginal misoprostol, intracervical Foley catheter, and intracervical dinoprostone. Aims and objectives: Comparison of efficacy of pervaginal misoprostol, intracervical Foley catheter, and intracervical dinoprostone on induction of labor and fetomaternal outcome. Materials and methods: It is a prospective study conducted on 273 patients divided into 3 groups, and each group included 90 study subjects.• Group I -Foley catheter of No. 18 introduced in the cervical canal. The Foley catheter balloon is filled with 50 mL of normal saline.• Group II -Dinoprostone 2.5 mL of 0.5 mg injected into the cervical canal below the internal os under aseptic precautions.• Group III -Tablet misoprostol 25-µg pervaginally put in the posterior fornix. Continuous observation of the patients will be done in all groups. Results: Success of induction was 100% in the Foley catheter, 92.3% in dinoprostone gel, and 90% in the misoprostol group, respectively. Vaginal delivery occurred-83.51% in Foley catheter, 59.34% in dinoprostone gel, and 73.62% in the misoprostol groups, respectively. The mean induction to delivery interval time was 16.78 ± 6.5 hours in the Foley catheter group, 12.87 ± 6.41 hours in the dinoprostone gel group, and 11.16 ± 5.97 in the misoprostol group. Conclusion: Foley catheter is superior to dinoprostone gel and misoprostol in achieving vaginal delivery.