RETRACTED ARTICLE: Uterine packing versus Foley’s catheter for the treatment of postpartum hemorrhage secondary to bleeding tendency in low-resource setting: A four-year observational study

Abstract

The use of uterine packing to arrest PPH is simple, quick and safe procedure to avoid further surgical interventions and to preserve the fertility in low-resource setting.

Intraluminal pressure of uterine balloon tamponade in the management of severe post‐partum hemorrhage

“…Application of intrauterine pressure to produce an internal compression effect to control PPH has probably evolved from uterine packing. While the earliest reports of uterine packing could be dated back to the 19th century, recent studies comparing uterine packing techniques with IUBT have found that they were equally effective without any increase in infective morbidity . In practice, effective uterine packing required appropriate training, and the packing procedure would likely take longer than the inflation of an IUBT.…”

“…Severe PPH was defined as an estimated blood loss exceeding 1000 mL. The procedure for the application of the Bakri balloon was in accordance with that generally described in the literature . The Bakri balloon can be placed transvaginally through the cervix or transabdominally through the caesarean uterine wound.…”

“…Traditionally, uterine packing has been employed as a method to control PPH by direct pressure effects . The use of the uterine‐specific Bakri intrauterine balloon tamponade (IUBT) for the treatment of obstetric hemorrhage with low‐lying placentae during cesarean delivery was first published in 1992 . Other non‐uterine‐specific balloons, such as the Sengstaken–Blakemore tube, Foley or Rusch catheters, have also been commonly used for the management of PPH, and in general, a success rate of over 80% has been reported .…”

Comparison of Safety and Efficacy of Intrauterine Foley’s Catheter Balloon and Uterovaginal Packing in Patients with Excessive Vaginal Bleeding after Vaginal Delivery

“…In my study, safety was significantly high in uterine packing group (Group A) compared to Foley's catheter balloon tamponade (group B) (72.34% versus 31.91%; respectively) with p-value of 0.0001 while comparing effectiveness, hemorrhage was controlled in 93.3% of uterovaginal packing cases compared to only 68.1% in the other group (p < 0.05). 13 In a study, Ashraf N and colleagues determined the efficacy of uterine packing for controlling PPH and they observed the success rate in 59.4% of patient while fever was noted in 92.5% of patient. 14 On the other hand, Ali MK et al found that Foley's catheter found effective in 88.2% of cases for controlling PPH while fever was noted in 26.7% of cases.…”

“…12 Recently, Rezk M et al in their study found success of uterovaginal packing to be >90% while 69 % in the other group (p < 0.05). 13 In a study, Ashraf N and colleagues determined the efficacy of uterine packing for controlling PPH and they observed the success rate in 59.4% of patient while fever was noted in 92.5% of patient. 14 On the other hand, Ali MK et al found that Foley's catheter found effective in 88.2% of cases.…”