Controlled Release Dinoprostone Insert and Foley Compared to Foley Alone: A Randomized Pilot TrialFunding The study is supported by grant funding from Ferring Pharmaceuticals (IIT-2016-100752). Partial funding was provided by National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, grant 1 U54GM104938.
Objective The aim of study is to compare, in a pilot study, combined dinoprostone vaginal insert and Foley catheter (DVI + Foley) with Foley alone (Foley) for cervical ripening and labor induction at term.
Study Design In this open-label pilot randomized controlled trial, women not in labor, with intact membranes, no prior uterine incision, an unfavorable cervix, gestational age ≥37 weeks, and a live, nonanomalous singleton fetus in cephalic presentation were randomly assigned, stratified by parity, to DVI + Foley or Foley. Oxytocin was used in both groups after cervical ripening. Primary outcome was time to vaginal delivery.
Results From April 2017 to January 2018, 100 women were randomized. Median (25–75th percentile) time to vaginal delivery for nulliparous women was 21.2 (16.6–38.0) hours with DVI + Foley (n = 26) compared with 31.3 (23.3–46.9) hours with Foley (n = 24) (Wilcoxon p = 0.05). Median time to vaginal delivery for parous women was 17.1 (13.6–21.9) hours with DVI + Foley (n = 25) compared with 14.8 (12.7–19.5) hours with Foley (n = 25) (Wilcoxon p = 0.21). Results were also analyzed to consider the competing risk of cesarean using cumulative incidence functions.
Conclusion Compared with Foley alone, combined use of the dinoprostone vaginal insert and Foley for cervical ripening may shorten time to vaginal delivery for nulliparous but not parous women.
The study was presented at the 39th annual meeting of the Society for Maternal–Fetal Medicine in Las Vegas, Nevada, held on February 11–16, 2019.
Eingereicht: 16. August 2019
Angenommen: 23. Januar 2020
02. März 2020 (online)
© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
- 1 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Wilson EC, Mathews TJ. Births: final data for 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2012; 61 (01) 1-72
- 2 Ventura SJ, Martin JA, Curtin SC, Menacker F, Hamilton BE. Births: final data for 1999. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2001; 49 (01) 1-100
- 3 Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal–Fetal Medicine Units Network. Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. N Engl J Med 2018; 379 (06) 513-523
- 4 Alfirevic Z, Kelly AJ, Dowswell T. Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (04) CD003246
- 5 Facchinetti F, Fontanesi F, Del Giovane C. Pre-induction of labour: comparing dinoprostone vaginal insert to repeated prostaglandin administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25 (10) 1965-1969
- 6 Edwards RK, Szychowski JM, Berger JL. et al. Foley catheter compared with the controlled-release dinoprostone insert: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123 (06) 1280-1287
- 7 Aduloju OP, Akintayo AA, Adanikin AI, Ade-Ojo IP. Combined Foley's catheter with vaginal misoprostol for pre-induction cervical ripening: a randomised controlled trial. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2016; 56 (06) 578-584
- 8 Lanka S, Surapaneni T, Nirmalan PK. Concurrent use of Foley catheter and misoprostol for induction of labor: a randomized clinical trial of efficacy and safety. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2014; 40 (06) 1527-1533
- 9 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstetric care consensus no. 1: safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123 (03) 693-711
- 10 Varadhan R, Weiss CO, Segal JB, Wu AW, Scharfstein D, Boyd C. Evaluating health outcomes in the presence of competing risks: a review of statistical methods and clinical applications. Med Care 2010; 48 (6, Suppl): S96-S105
- 11 Gooley TA, Leisenring W, Crowley J, Storer BE. Estimation of failure probabilities in the presence of competing risks: new representations of old estimators. Stat Med 1999; 18 (06) 695-706
- 12 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42 (02) 377-381
- 13 Carbone JF, Tuuli MG, Fogertey PJ, Roehl KA, Macones GA. Combination of Foley bulb and vaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal misoprostol alone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 121 (2 Pt 1): 247-252
- 14 Chen W, Xue J, Gaudet L, Walker M, Wen SW. Meta-analysis of Foley catheter plus misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for cervical ripening. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2015; 129 (03) 193-198
- 15 Al-Ibraheemi Z, Brustman L, Bimson BE, Porat N, Rosenn B. Misoprostol with Foley bulb compared with misoprostol alone for cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131 (01) 23-29
- 16 Levine LD, Downes KL, Elovitz MA, Parry S, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. Mechanical and pharmacologic methods of labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2016; 128 (06) 1357-1364
- 17 Pettker CM, Pocock SB, Smok DP, Lee SM, Devine PC. Transcervical Foley catheter with and without oxytocin for cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 111 (06) 1320-1326
- 18 Bauer AM, Lappen JR, Gecsi KS, Hackney DN. Cervical ripening balloon with and without oxytocin in multiparas: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018; 219 (03) 294.e1-294.e6
- 19 Schoen CN, Grant G, Berghella V, Hoffman MK, Sciscione A. Intracervical Foley catheter with and without oxytocin for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2017; 129 (06) 1046-1053