4.6 Article

Induction of labor using a Foley balloon, with and without extra-amniotic saline infusion

Journal

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
Volume 107, Issue 2, Pages 234-239

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000198629.44186.c8

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To compare transcervical Foley bulb with and without extra-amniotic saline infusion for induction of labor in patients with an unfavorable cervix. METHODS: Women who presented for induction of labor with Bishop score less than 5 were randomly assigned to receive Foley alone or Foley with extraamniotic saline infusion for induction of labor. Primary outcome was time from start of induction to vaginal delivery. Secondary outcomes were cesarean delivery rates, incidence of chorioamnionitis, Apgar scores at 1 and 5 minutes, and adverse events. RESULTS: One hundred forty women completed the study. Time from induction to vaginal delivery was 16.58 (+/- 7.55) hours in the extra-amniotic saline infusion group compared with 21.47 (+/- 9.95) hours in the Foley group (P < .01). Chorioamnionitis occurred in 4 of 66 (6.1%) women in the extra-amniotic saline infusion group compared with 12 of 74 (16.2%) women in the Foley group (P = .067). Cesarean delivery rate was 21.2% versus 20.1% in the extra-amniotic saline infusion and Foley groups, respectively (P = 1.0). Median 1-minute and 5-minute Apgar scores were 9 in both groups. Adverse events were rare and unrelated to method of induction. CONCLUSION: Induction of labor by using Foley with extra-amniotic saline infusion results in shorter induction-to-vaginal-delivery time than Foley alone, without affecting cesarean delivery rates.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available