Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-10-2016 | Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Induction of labor in nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix: a comparison of Foley catheter and vaginal prostaglandin E₂

Authors: Yossi Mizrachi, Michal Levy, Jacob Bar, Michal Kovo

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 4/2016

Abstract

Purpose

To compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of two methods of labor induction in nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix.

Methods

A case–control study was performed on nulliparous women with a cervical Bishop score < 6, who underwent induction of labor with either extra-amniotic Foley catheter (Foley catheter study group) or vaginal tablets of prostaglandin E₂ (PGE₂ control group). The control group was matched for gestational age and for the indication to induce labor.

Results

A total of 346 nulliparous women were included. Similar rates of cesarean delivery were found in the Foley catheter and the PGE₂ groups (25.4 vs. 24.2 %, respectively, p = 0.8), without differences in maternal or neonatal adverse outcomes. In the Foley catheter group, induction to delivery interval was shorter compared with the PGE₂ group (25.1 vs. 36.6 h, respectively, p < 0.001), and more women delivered within 24 h (55.0 vs. 40.4 %, respectively, p = 0.01).

Conclusion

Induction of labor with Foley catheter in nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix is associated with shorter induction to delivery interval, but with similar rates of cesarean deliveries and adverse pregnancy outcomes, as compared with vaginal tablets of PGE₂.

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Matthews TJ (2015) Births: final data for 2013. Natl Vital Stat Rep 64(1):1–65

ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107 (2009) Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 114(2 Pt 1):386–397. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b48ef5

Bishop EH (1964) Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 24:266–268PubMed

Vrouenraets FP, Roumen FJ, Dehing CJ, van den Akker ES, Aarts MJ, Scheve EJ (2005) Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 105(4):690–697. doi:10.1097/01.aog.0000152338.76759.38 CrossRefPubMed

Jozwiak M, Bloemenkamp KW, Kelly AJ, Mol BW, Irion O, Boulvain M (2012) Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:CD001233. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub2 PubMed

Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Sciscione AC, Hoffman MK (2005) Labor progression and risk of cesarean delivery in electively induced nulliparas. Obstet Gynecol 105(4):698–704. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000157436.68847.3b CrossRefPubMed

Maslow AS, Sweeny AL (2000) Elective induction of labor as a risk factor for cesarean delivery among low-risk women at term. Obstet Gynecol 95(6 Pt 1):917–922PubMed

Pevzner L, Rayburn WF, Rumney P, Wing DA (2009) Factors predicting successful labor induction with dinoprostone and misoprostol vaginal inserts. Obstet Gynecol 114(2 Pt 1):261–267. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181ad9377 CrossRefPubMed

Ehrenthal DB, Jiang X, Strobino DM (2010) Labor induction and the risk of a cesarean delivery among nulliparous women at term. Obstet Gynecol 116(1):35–42. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e10c5c CrossRefPubMed

10.

Coonrod DV, Drachman D, Hobson P, Manriquez M (2008) Nulliparous term singleton vertex cesarean delivery rates: institutional and individual level predictors. Am J Obstet Gynecol 198(6):694e611–694e691. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.03.026 discussion 694 e611 CrossRef

11.

Memon F, Wijesiriwardana A, Jonker L (2011) Maternal and prenatal factors influencing the outcome of prostaglandin E2 induced labour. J Obstet Gynaecol 31(3):220–223. doi:10.3109/01443615.2010.544424 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Suffecool K, Rosenn BM, Kam S, Mushi J, Foroutan J, Herrera K (2014) Labor induction in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix: double balloon catheter versus dinoprostone. J Perinat Med 42(2):213–218. doi:10.1515/jpm-2013-0152 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Abramovici D, Goldwasser S, Mabie BC, Mercer BM, Goldwasser R, Sibai BM (1999) A randomized comparison of oral misoprostol versus Foley catheter and oxytocin for induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 181(5 Pt 1):1108–1112CrossRefPubMed

14.

Culver J, Strauss RA, Brody S, Dorman K, Timlin S, McMahon MJ (2004) A randomized trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter with concurrent oxytocin for labor induction in nulliparous women. Am J Perinatol 21(3):139–146. doi:10.1055/s-2004-823777 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Pennell CE, Henderson JJ, O’Neill MJ, McChlery S, Doherty DA, Dickinson JE (2009) Induction of labour in nulliparous women with an unfavourable cervix: a randomised controlled trial comparing double and single balloon catheters and PGE2 gel. BJOG 116(11):1443–1452. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02279.x CrossRefPubMed

16.

Dollberg S, Haklai Z, Mimouni FB, Gorfein I, Gordon ES (2005) Birth weight standards in the live-born population in Israel. Isr Med Assoc J: IMAJ 7(5):311–314PubMed

17.

ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 106 (2009) Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles. Obstet Gynecol 114(1):192–202. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181aef106 CrossRef

18.

Aghideh FK, Mullin PM, Ingles S, Ouzounian JG, Opper N, Wilson ML, Miller DA, Lee RH (2014) A comparison of obstetrical outcomes with labor induction agents used at term. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 27(6):592–596. doi:10.3109/14767058.2013.831066 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Shetty A, Burt R, Rice P, Templeton A (2005) Women’s perceptions, expectations and satisfaction with induced labour—a questionnaire-based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 123(1):56–61. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.03.004 CrossRefPubMed

20.

van Baaren GJ, Jozwiak M, Opmeer BC, Oude Rengerink K, Benthem M, Dijksterhuis MG, van Huizen ME, van der Salm PC, Schuitemaker NW, Papatsonis DN, Perquin DA, Porath M, van der Post JA, Rijnders RJ, Scheepers HC, Spaanderman M, van Pampus MG, de Leeuw JW, Mol BW, Bloemenkamp KW (2013) Cost-effectiveness of induction of labour at term with a Foley catheter compared to vaginal prostaglandin E(2) gel (PROBAAT trial). BJOG 120(8):987–995. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12221 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Taher SE, Inder JW, Soltan SA, Eliahoo J, Edmonds DK, Bennett PR (2011) Prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel or tablets for the induction of labour at term: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 118(6):719–725. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02901.x CrossRefPubMed

22.

Fox NS, Saltzman DH, Roman AS, Klauser CK, Moshier E, Rebarber A (2011) Intravaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter for labour induction: a meta-analysis. BJOG 118(6):647–654. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02905.x CrossRefPubMed

23.

Heinemann J, Gillen G, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM (2008) Do mechanical methods of cervical ripening increase infectious morbidity? A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199(2):177–187. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.05.005 discussion 187–178 CrossRefPubMed

24.

Thomas J, Fairclough A, Kavanagh J, Kelly AJ (2014) Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD003101. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003101.pub3 PubMed

25.

Parkes I, Kabiri D, Hants Y, Ezra Y (2014) The indication for induction of labor impacts the risk of cesarean delivery. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. doi:10.3109/14767058.2014.993965 PubMed

Title: Induction of labor in nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix: a comparison of Foley catheter and vaginal prostaglandin E2
Authors: Yossi Mizrachi
Michal Levy
Jacob Bar
Michal Kovo
Publication date: 01-10-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 4/2016
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-016-4026-9

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Induction of labor in nulliparous women with unfavorable cervix: a comparison of Foley catheter and vaginal prostaglandin E₂

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

Evaluation of biochemical markers combined with uterine artery Doppler parameters in fetuses with growth restriction: a case–control study

Growth hormone co-treatment within a GnRH agonist long protocol improves implantation and pregnancy rates in patients undergoing IVF-ET

Implications of maternal conditions and pregnancy course on offspring’s medical problems in adult life

Correlation of fetal scalp blood sampling pH with neonatal outcome umbilical artery pH value

Uterine folding hemostasis: a simpler and safer technique for controlling atonic postpartum hemorrhage

Prenatal diagnosis of fetal akinesia deformation sequence (FADS): a study of 79 consecutive cases