We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
[Double-balloon catheter compared to vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening in obese women at term].
Gynecologie, Obstetrique, Fertilite & Senologie 2017 October
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of a double-balloon catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) for cervical ripening in obese patients with unfavorable cervix at term.
METHODS: The study had an open-label, prospective combined with retrospective, observational design. From January 2013 until May 2016, a prospective cohort study of 46 women with pre-pregnancy BMI>30kg/m2 , live singleton term fetuses (>37 weeks) in vertex presentation and unfavorable cervix (Bishop score<6), who underwent labor induction for conventional indications using a double-balloon catheter. In the same period, 46 obese women who had undergone cervical ripening using vaginal dinoprostone (3mg) were retrospectively included. Women in groups were paired according to Bishop score before the insertion, pre-pregnancy BMI and parity. The primary outcome was a favorable cervix (Bishop score ≥6) 24h after cervical ripening.
RESULTS: After 24h, there was a significantly higher rate of women with favorable cervix (Bishop score ≥6) in the double-balloon group than in dinoprostone group (80.4% vs 47.8%; P=0.001). After adjustment, a double-balloon catheter was significantly associated with an efficient cervical ripening compared to vaginal dinoprostone (aOR 7.81, 95% CI 2.58-23.60). No difference was observed in cesarean section rate (39.1% in each group; P=0.96) and in mean induction time to vaginal delivery (34.5h in the balloon group vs 36.5h in the dinoprostone group; P=0.53). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar.
CONCLUSION: For obese patients at term, cervical ripening using a double-balloon catheter is more efficient on Bishop score after 24h compared to vaginal dinoprostone.
METHODS: The study had an open-label, prospective combined with retrospective, observational design. From January 2013 until May 2016, a prospective cohort study of 46 women with pre-pregnancy BMI>30kg/m2 , live singleton term fetuses (>37 weeks) in vertex presentation and unfavorable cervix (Bishop score<6), who underwent labor induction for conventional indications using a double-balloon catheter. In the same period, 46 obese women who had undergone cervical ripening using vaginal dinoprostone (3mg) were retrospectively included. Women in groups were paired according to Bishop score before the insertion, pre-pregnancy BMI and parity. The primary outcome was a favorable cervix (Bishop score ≥6) 24h after cervical ripening.
RESULTS: After 24h, there was a significantly higher rate of women with favorable cervix (Bishop score ≥6) in the double-balloon group than in dinoprostone group (80.4% vs 47.8%; P=0.001). After adjustment, a double-balloon catheter was significantly associated with an efficient cervical ripening compared to vaginal dinoprostone (aOR 7.81, 95% CI 2.58-23.60). No difference was observed in cesarean section rate (39.1% in each group; P=0.96) and in mean induction time to vaginal delivery (34.5h in the balloon group vs 36.5h in the dinoprostone group; P=0.53). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar.
CONCLUSION: For obese patients at term, cervical ripening using a double-balloon catheter is more efficient on Bishop score after 24h compared to vaginal dinoprostone.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app