Abstract
Objective To evaluate for difference in outcomes between single- and double-balloon catheters
for labor induction.
Study Design We searched CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Register, MEDLINE, ISI Web of Sciences, LILACs,
and Google Scholar and retrieved studies through May 2017. Selection criteria included
randomized controlled trials comparing single- versus double-balloon catheters. The
primary outcome was time from catheter insertion to delivery. Heterogeneity of the
results among studies was tested with the quantity I2
. For I2
values ≥50%, a random effects model was used to pool data across studies. Summary
measures were reported as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) or as a mean difference (MD)
with 95% confidence interval (CI).
Results Four trials including a total of 682 patients were included: 340 patients were randomized
to induction with a single-balloon catheter and 342 to induction with a double-balloon
catheter. There was no significant difference between groups with respect to time
to delivery (18.8 vs. 19.6 hours; MD: 0.40; 95% CI: –1.56 to 0.76), vaginal delivery
rate (65.3 vs. 62.3%; aOR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.56–1.92), cesarean delivery rate (25.6
vs. 27.5%; aOR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.55–1.73), or epidural use (58.4 vs. 62%; aOR: 0.81;
95% CI: 0.56–1.18).
Conclusion Double-balloon catheters have no apparent advantage over single-balloon catheters
for labor induction.
Keywords
Cook catheter - double-balloon catheter - Foley catheter - induction of labor - meta-analysis
- single-balloon catheter
