A Randomized Trial Comparing Vaginal Misoprostol versus Foley Catheter with Concurrent Oxytocin for Labor Induction in Nulliparous Women

American Journal of Perinatology

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 139-146

  Culver, James ^b   Strauss, Robert A ^a,b   Brody, Seth ^c   Dorman, Karen ^b   Timlin, Sally ^c   McMahon, Michael J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c WakeMed ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Foley catheter; Induction; Misoprostol

Indexed keywords

MISOPROSTOL; OXYTOCIN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BALLOON CATHETER; CESAREAN SECTION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; FEMALE; FEVER; HUMAN; LABOR INDUCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL MORBIDITY; MUSCLE HYPERTONIA; NULLIPARA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

ADMINISTRATION, INTRAVAGINAL; ADULT; BALLOON DILATATION; CERVIX UTERI; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEMALE; HUMANS; LABOR, INDUCED; MISOPROSTOL; OXYTOCICS; OXYTOCIN; PARITY; PREGNANCY; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 1942454432     PISSN: 07351631     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-823777     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 10: Induction of Labor. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 1999
2. Macer JA, Macer CL, Chan LS. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor: a retrospective study of complications and outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992;166:1690-1696
3. Sherman DJ, Frenkel E, Tovbin J, Arieli S, Caspi E, Bukovsky I. Ripening of the unfavorable cervix with extraamniotic catheter balloon: clinical experience and review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1996;51:621-627
4. Sciscione AC, Nguyen L, Manley J, Pollock M, Maas B, Colmorgen G. A randomized comparison of transcervical Foley catheter to intravaginal misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol 2001;97:603-607
5. Vengalil SR, Guinn DA, Olabi NF, Burd LI, Owen J. A randomized trial of misoprostol and extra-amniotic saline infusion for cervical ripening and labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:774-779
6. Abramovici D, Goldwasser S, Mabie BC, Mercer BM, Goldwasser R, Sibai BM. A randomized comparison of oral misoprostol versus Foley catheter and oxytocin for induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:1108-1112
7. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 248. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2000
8. Hofmeyr GJ, Gulmezoglu AM, Alfirevic Z. Misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999;106:798-803
9. Wing DA, Park MR, Paul RH. A randomized comparison of oral and intravaginal misoprostol for labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:905-908
10. Bennett KA, Butt K, Crane JM, Hutchens D, Young DC. A masked randomized comparison of oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol for labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92:481-486
11. Adair CD, Weeks JW, Barrilleaux S, Edwards M, Burlison K, Lewis DF. Oral or vaginal misoprostol administration for induction of labor: a randomized, double-blind trial. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92:810-813
12. Giacalone PL, Targosz V, Laffargue F, Boog G, Faure JM. Cervical ripening with mifepristone before labor induction: a randomized study. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92: 487-492
13. Buser D, Mora G, Arias F. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:581-585
14. Abramovici D, Goldwasser S, Mabie BC, Mercer BM, Goldwasser R, Sibai BM. A randomized comparison of oral misoprostol versus Foley catheter and oxytocin for induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181: 1108-1112