Induction to Delivery Interval Using Transcervical Foley Catheter Plus Oxytocin and Vaginal Misoprostol: A Comparative Study at Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria

Overview

Journal Ann Afr Med

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2016 Aug 24

PMID 27549415

Citations 6

Authors

Ibrahim Garba

Abubakar Shehu Muhammed

Zakari Muhammad

Hadiza Shehu Galadanci

Rabiu Ayyuba

Idris Sulaiman Abubakar

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Induction of labor (IOL) is an artificial initiation of labor before its spontaneous onset for the purpose of delivery of the fetoplacental unit. Many factors are associated with its success in postdatism.

Objective: To compare the induction delivery intervals using transcervical Foley catheter plus oxytocin and vaginal misoprostol, and to identify the factors associated with successful induction among postdate singleton multiparae.

Materials And Methods: The study was a prospective randomized controlled trial of singleton multiparous pregnant women. They were randomized into two groups, one group for intravaginal misoprostol and the other group for transcervical Foley catheter insertion as a method of cervical ripening and IOL. The data were analyzed using SPSS version 17 computer software (SPSS Inc., IL, Chicago, USA). Comparisons of categorical variables were done using Chi-squared test, with P < 0.05 considered as significant. Student's t-test was used for continuous variables.

Results: The incidence of postdatism was found to be 136 (13.1%). The mean induction delivery time interval was shorter in the misoprostol group 70 (5.54 ± 1.8 h) than in the Foley catheter oxytocin infusion group 66 (6.65 ± 1.7 h) (P = 0.035). There was, however, no statistically significant difference in the maternal and neonatal outcomes when these two agents were used for cervical ripening and IOL. Higher parity and higher Bishop's score were the factors found to be associated with high success rate of IOL (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Vaginal misoprostol resulted in shorter induction delivery time interval as compared to transcervical Foley catheter. High parity and high Bishop's scores were the factors found to be associated with the success of IOL.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Misoprostol with Foley Catheter vs Misoprostol alone for Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labor in Patients with Premature Rupture of Membrane: A Randomized Clinical Trial Study.

PoorHosseini S, Mirteimouri M, RakhshaniFar M, Houra Mousavi Vahed S, Haghollahi F Adv Biomed Res. 2024; 13:18.

PMID: 38525402 PMC: 10958730. DOI: 10.4103/abr.abr_78_23.

Mechanical methods for induction of labour.

de Vaan M, Ten Eikelder M, Jozwiak M, Palmer K, Davies-Tuck M, Bloemenkamp K Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023; 3:CD001233.

PMID: 36996264 PMC: 10061553. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub4.

Vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical Foley catheter for cervical ripening in postdate primigravid women: a randomized clinical trial.

Abdi N, Alavi A, Pakbaz F, Darabi H BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021; 21(1):533.

PMID: 34315413 PMC: 8317279. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-021-04011-0.

Mechanical methods for induction of labour.

de Vaan M, Ten Eikelder M, Jozwiak M, Palmer K, Davies-Tuck M, Bloemenkamp K Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 10:CD001233.

PMID: 31623014 PMC: 6953206. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub3.

Sublingual Misoprostol versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening in women with preeclampsia or gestational hypertension: A randomized control trial.

Ayati S, Hasanzadeh E, Pourali L, Shakeri M, Vatanchi A Int J Reprod Biomed. 2019; 17(7):513-520.

PMID: 31508577 PMC: 6718879. DOI: 10.18502/ijrm.v17i7.4863.

References

Bako B, Obed J, Sanusi I . Methods of induction of labour at the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital, Maiduguri: a 4-year review. Niger J Med. 2008; 17(2):139-42. DOI: 10.4314/njm.v17i2.37272. View

Lawani O, Onyebuchi A, Iyoke C, Okafo C, Ajah L . Obstetric outcome and significance of labour induction in a health resource poor setting. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2014; 2014:419621. PMC: 3918372. DOI: 10.1155/2014/419621. View

Bartusevicius A, Barcaite E, Nadisauskiene R . Oral, vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005; 91(1):2-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.07.002. View

Beischer N, Evans J, Townsend L . Studies in prolonged pregnancy. I. The incidence of prolonged pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1969; 103(4):476-82. DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9378(15)31849-4. View

Hilder L, Costeloe K, Thilaganathan B . Prolonged pregnancy: evaluating gestation-specific risks of fetal and infant mortality. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998; 105(2):169-73. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb10047.x. View

Cotzias C, Paterson-Brown S, Fisk N . Prospective risk of unexplained stillbirth in singleton pregnancies at term: population based analysis. BMJ. 1999; 319(7205):287-8. PMC: 28178. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.319.7205.287. View

Raynor B . Misoprostol induction of labor among women with a history of cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 184(6):1115-7. DOI: 10.1067/mob.2001.115177. View

Ekele B, Isah A . Cervical ripening: how long can the Foley catheter safely remain in the cervical canal?. Afr J Reprod Health. 2003; 6(3):98-102. View

NAEYE R . Causes of perinatal mortality excess in prolonged gestations. Am J Epidemiol. 1978; 108(5):429-33. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a112641. View

10.

Hannah M, Hannah W, Hellmann J, Hewson S, Milner R, Willan A . Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. The Canadian Multicenter Post-term Pregnancy Trial Group. N Engl J Med. 1992; 326(24):1587-92. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199206113262402. View

11.

Rayburn W, Chang F . Management of the uncomplicated postdate pregnancy. J Reprod Med. 1981; 26(2):93-5. View

12.

Gonen R, Degani S, Ron A . Prediction of successful induction of labor: comparison of transvaginal ultrasonography and the Bishop score. Eur J Ultrasound. 1998; 7(3):183-7. DOI: 10.1016/s0929-8266(98)00042-1. View

13.

Crowley P . Interventions for preventing or improving the outcome of delivery at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000; (2):CD000170. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000170. View

14.

Rand L, Robinson J, Economy K, Norwitz E . Post-term induction of labor revisited. Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 96(5 Pt 1):779-83. DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)01002-4. View

15.

Mbele A, Makin J, Pattinson R . Can the outcome of induction of labour with oral misoprostol be predicted. S Afr Med J. 2007; 97(4):289-92. View

16.

Hofmeyr G, Gulmezoglu A . Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction in late pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000; (2):CD000941. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000941. View

17.

Sachs B, Friedman E . Results of an epidemiologic study of postdate pregnancy. J Reprod Med. 1986; 31(3):162-6. View

18.

Martin J, Hamilton B, Ventura S, Osterman M, Kirmeyer S, Mathews T . Births: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2012; 60(1):1-70. View

19.

Fletcher H, Mitchell S, Frederick J, Simeon D, Brown D . Intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone as cervical ripening and labor-inducing agents. Obstet Gynecol. 1994; 83(2):244-7. View

20.

Owolabi A, Kuti O, Ogunlola I . Randomised trial of intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005; 25(6):565-8. DOI: 10.1080/01443610500231450. View