Randomized Control Study of Foley bulb and Vaginal Misoprostol Compared with Vaginal Misoprostol Alone in Induction of labour

Ashwini, M N; Kamatar, Saroja C; Mann, Deepika

doi:10.5958/0976-5506.2018.00263.2

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The predominant country of origin was the United States (16 studies). 14e18,20,23e25, 27,28,33,34,39,40,42 Studies from India, 21,26,32,37,41 Egypt, 29e31 Iran, 36 Israel, 22 Nigeria, 19,43 Kenya, 38 and Pakistan 35 were also included. The specific study characteristics and outcomes are listed in Table 1.…”

Section: Obstetrics Original Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overall quality of the studies included was rated as high, with 7 studies of uncertain quality. 21,22,26,29,32,36,41 Outcomes A total of 15 studies ( 2180 women) reported the time from induction to vaginal delivery. 14e17,20,22,24,26e28, 30,34,35,37,39 When compared with Foley alone, the use of Foley-oxytocin reduced the time to vaginal delivery by 4.2 hours (mean duration [MD], e4.2 hours; 95% CI, e6.5 to e1.9).…”

Section: Assessment Of Risk Of Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Combination of Foley and prostaglandins versus Foley and oxytocin for cervical ripening: a network meta-analysis

Orr¹,

Reisinger‐Kindle

Roy

et al. 2020

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Trial and meta-analysis data revealed a reduction in time to delivery for Foley and prostaglandins or Foley and oxytocin vs Foley alone. However, there are limited data for the comparison of the 2 combination methods against each other. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether Foley and prostaglandins or Foley and oxytocin decrease the time to vaginal delivery using a network meta-analysis. STUDY DESIGN: A network meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42018081948) was performed comparing Foley and prostaglandins (prostaglandin E1 or prostaglandin E2) vs Foley and oxytocin for cervical ripening. Foley alone and prostaglandins alone were used as nodes for indirect comparison. Database searches were performed from inception to March 2020 with data abstracted from published manuscripts. Eligibility criteria included randomized trials comparing Foley and oxytocin with Foley and prostaglandins (misoprostol or dinoprostone). Trials that compared Foley catheter or prostaglandins with a combination of Foley and prostaglandins or Foley and concurrent oxytocin were also included. Nulliparous and multiparous women were analyzed together. Foley catheters of any catheter material or size and >24 weeks' gestational age with a live fetus were included. Quasi-randomized, cohorts, and other combination methods for cervical ripening were not included. Prostaglandin E1 and prostaglandin E2 combined methods were analyzed separately in a planned subanalysis. The primary outcome was the mean time from induction to vaginal delivery in hours. Secondary outcomes included time from induction to delivery, delivery within 24 hours, cesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, endometritis, epidural use, tachysystole, postpartum hemorrhage, meconium, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and 5minute appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration score of <7. Data were analyzed as a network meta-analysis using multivariate meta-regression.RESULTS: A total of 30 randomized controlled trials with a total of 6465 women were considered eligible for inclusion in this network metaanalysis. When compared with Foley alone, the use of Foley-oxytocin reduced the time to vaginal delivery by 4.2 hours (mean duration, e4.2 hours; 95% confidence interval, e6.5 to e1.9). Foley-prostaglandins reduced the time to vaginal delivery compared with Foley but did not meet statistical significance (mean duration, e2.9 hours; 95% confidence interval, e5.7 to 0.0; P¼.05). When compared head-to-head, there was no difference in the time to vaginal delivery between Foley-prostaglandins and Foley-oxytocin (mean duration, 1.3 hours; 95% confidence interval, e2.0 to 4.7). There was no difference in the rate of cesarean delivery, chorioamnionitis, epidural, tachysystole, postpartum hemorrhage, meconium, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, or 5-minute appearance, pulse, grimace, activity, and respiration score of <7 for Foley-prostaglandins vs Foley-oxytocin, although the rate of endometritis was high for Foley-prostaglandins. In the subanalysis by prostaglandin...

show abstract

Section: Obstetrics Original Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assessment Of Risk Of Biasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combination of Foley and prostaglandins versus Foley and oxytocin for cervical ripening: a network meta-analysis

Orr¹,

Reisinger‐Kindle

Roy

et al. 2020

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the 224 records found through database searches, 30 RCTs were identified and assessed for eligibility. Seventeen of the RCTs did not meet the inclusion criteria for the correct intervention and full text could not be obtained for 3 of the studies, leaving a total of 10 RCTs to be included in the meta-analysis [33,[48][49][50][51][52][53][54]56,57] (Figure 1).…”

Section: Study Selection Quality Assessment and Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If risk is assessed without the fifth domain, 5 studies are considered low risk, 3 with some concerns, and 2 are categorized as high risk ( Table 1). Two of the studies (Kashanian et al 2006 [33] and Ashwini et al 2018 [56]) had high risk of bias in almost all of the domains assessed, as well as overall assessment, so they were excluded from further analyses. The characteristic of each trial is listed in detail in table 2.…”

Section: Study Selection Quality Assessment and Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have compared the two methods, intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter, individually or when used concurrently [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59]. It has been proposed that the two different mechanisms may have synergistic effects, as found by Al-Ibraheemi Z et al and numerous other authors [48][49][50]52,53].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intracervical Foley Catheter Plus Intravaginal Misoprostol vs Intravaginal Misoprostol Alone for Cervical Ripening: A Meta-Analysis

Lee

Huang

Chen

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, there is no meta-analysis comparing intravaginal misoprostol plus intracervical Foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol alone for term pregnancy without identifying risk factors. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing concurrent intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol alone for cervical ripening. We systematically searched Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Collaboration databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intracervical Foley catheter plus intravaginal misoprostol and intravaginal misoprostol alone using the search terms “Foley”, “misoprostol”, “cervical ripening”, and “induction” up to 29 January 2019. Data were extracted and analyzed by two independent reviewers including study characteristics, induction time, cesarean section (C/S), clinical suspicion of chorioamnionitis, uterine tachysystole, meconium stain, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions. Data was pooled using random effects modeling and calculated with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Pooled analysis from eight studies, including 1110 women, showed that labor induction using a combination of intracervical Foley catheter and intravaginal misoprostol decreased induction time by 2.71 h (95% CI −4.33 to −1.08, p = 0.001), as well as the risk of uterine tachysystole and meconium staining (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30–0.99 and RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32–0.73, respectively) significantly compared to those using intravaginal misoprostol alone. However, there was no difference in C/S rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78–1.11) or clinical suspicion of chorioamnionitis rate (RR 1.22, CI 0.58–2.57) between the two groups. Labor induction with a combination of intracervical Foley catheter and intravaginal misoprostol may be a better choice based on advantages in shortening induction time and reducing the risk of uterine tachysystole and meconium staining compared to intravaginal misoprostol alone.

show abstract

Intracervical Foley catheter plus intravaginal misoprostol compared to intravaginal misoprostol-only for cervical ripening: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yin

Chen

et al. 2023

European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductiv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Randomized Control Study of Foley bulb and Vaginal Misoprostol Compared with Vaginal Misoprostol Alone in Induction of labour

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Combination of Foley and prostaglandins versus Foley and oxytocin for cervical ripening: a network meta-analysis

Combination of Foley and prostaglandins versus Foley and oxytocin for cervical ripening: a network meta-analysis

Intracervical Foley Catheter Plus Intravaginal Misoprostol vs Intravaginal Misoprostol Alone for Cervical Ripening: A Meta-Analysis

Intracervical Foley catheter plus intravaginal misoprostol compared to intravaginal misoprostol-only for cervical ripening: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About