Effectiveness of Dinoprostone and Cook's Balloon for Labor Induction in Primipara Women at Term
- PMID: 33123908
- DOI: 10.1007/s11596-020-2274-1
Effectiveness of Dinoprostone and Cook's Balloon for Labor Induction in Primipara Women at Term
Abstract
Labor induction is commonly used for achieving successful vaginal delivery. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of dinoprostone and Cook's balloon as labor-inducing agents in primipara women at term. A retrospective cohort study among primipara women was conducted in Hubei Maternity and Child Health Hospital. Basic clinical characteristics were collected. The main outcomes were vaginal delivery rate, cesarean section rate and forceps delivery rate. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes were also compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were further performed to evaluate the predictors for vaginal delivery within 24 h. A total of 845 eligible primipara women undergoing labor induction were recruited. Of them, 141 women were induced with dinoprostone (dinoprostone group, DG), and 704 with Cook's balloon (Cook's balloon group, CG). Groups were homogeneous except more women with premature rupture of membranes in DG, with gestational hypertension in CG (P<0.05). The vaginal delivery rate within 12 h was 1.98% and 16.52% in CG and DG respectively (P=0.0001). Besides, the vaginal delivery rate within 24 h was 37.62% and 52.26% in CG and DG respectively (P=0.0079). DG showed the lower rate of oxytocin augmentation, artificial rupture of membrane and postpartum hemorrhage and the shorter interval from insertion to active labor than CG (P<0.05). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that abortion history, oxytocin augmentation, artificial rupture of membrane, and obstetric analgesia were independent predictors for vaginal delivery within 24 h. In conclusion, dinoprostone was more effective than Cook's balloon to induce labor and achieve vaginal birth in the sample of primipara women at term.
Keywords: Cook’s balloon; dinoprostone; independent predictors; induction of labor; vaginal delivery.
Similar articles
-
Impact of dinoprostone versus cook cervical ripening balloon on induction in pregnancies complicated by small-for-gestational-age fetuses at term.J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2024 Dec;37(1):2381584. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2024.2381584. Epub 2024 Jul 21. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2024. PMID: 39034273
-
Efficacy and safety of misoprostol, dinoprostone and Cook's balloon for labour induction in women with foetal growth restriction at term.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017 Oct;296(4):777-781. doi: 10.1007/s00404-017-4492-8. Epub 2017 Aug 22. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017. PMID: 28831553
-
Cook's balloon versus dinoprostone for Labour induction of term pregnancies with fetal GROWth restriction: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in tertiary maternity hospitals in Spain (COLIGROW study).BMJ Open. 2024 Sep 30;14(9):e089628. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089628. BMJ Open. 2024. PMID: 39349375 Free PMC article.
-
[Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Timing of Labor Induction].Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2020 Jan;48(1):35-47. doi: 10.1016/j.gofs.2019.10.015. Epub 2019 Oct 25. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2020. PMID: 31669525 Review. French.
-
Double-balloon catheter versus dinoprostone insert for labour induction: a meta-analysis.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 Jan;299(1):7-12. doi: 10.1007/s00404-018-4929-8. Epub 2018 Oct 12. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019. PMID: 30315411 Review.
Cited by
-
Conventional versus modified application of COOK Cervical Ripening Balloon for induction of labor at term: a randomized controlled trial.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022 Oct 2;22(1):739. doi: 10.1186/s12884-022-05035-w. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022. PMID: 36184583 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Efficacy and safety of double balloon catheter and dinoprostone for labor induction in multipara at term.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Feb;309(2):533-540. doi: 10.1007/s00404-022-06891-9. Epub 2023 Feb 20. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024. PMID: 36801968 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Lawani OL, Onyebuchi AK, Iyoke CA, et al. Obstetric outcome and significance of labour induction in a health resource poor setting. J Obstet Gynecol Int, 2014,2014(419621):1–5
-
- Bulletins—Obstetrics ACOP ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol, 2009, 114(1):386–397
-
- Laughon SK, Zhang J, Grewal J, et al. Induction of labor in a contemporary obstetric cohort. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2012,206(6):486.e481–486.e489 - DOI
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical