Foley Catheter versus Vaginal Misoprostol: Randomized Controlled Trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature

Marta Jozwiak; Mieke ten Eikelder; Katrien Oude Rengerink; Christianne de Groot; Hanneke Feitsma; Marc Spaanderman; Marielle van Pampus; Jan Willem de Leeuw; Ben Willem Mol; Kitty Bloemenkamp

doi:10.1055/s-0033-1341573

Foley Catheter versus Vaginal Misoprostol: Randomized Controlled Trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature

Marta Jozwiak^*, Mieke ten Eikelder, Katrien Oude Rengerink, Christianne de Groot, Hanneke Feitsma, Marc Spaanderman, Marielle van Pampus, Jan Willem de Leeuw, Ben Willem Mol, Kitty Bloemenkamp

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Objectives To assess effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol for term induction of labor. Study DesignThis trial randomly allocated women with singleton term pregnancy to 30-mL Foley catheter or 25-g vaginal misoprostol tablets. Primary outcome was cesarean delivery rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time to birth. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted. ResultsFifty-six women were allocated to Foley catheter, 64 to vaginal misoprostol tablets. Cesarean delivery rates did not differ significantly (25% Foley versus 17% misoprostol; relative risk [RR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 2.94), with more cesarean deliveries due to failure to progress in the Foley group (14% versus 3%; RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.64). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable. Time from induction to birth was longer in the Foley catheter group (36 hours versus 25 hours; p

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	145-155
Journal	American Journal of Perinatology
Volume	31
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1341573
Publication status	Published - Feb 2014

Keywords

cervical ripening
labor induction
Foley catheter
misoprostol
prostaglandin E1
cesarean delivery rate

Access to Document

10.1055/s-0033-1341573

Cite this

Jozwiak, M., ten Eikelder, M., Rengerink, K. O., de Groot, C., Feitsma, H., Spaanderman, M., van Pampus, M., de Leeuw, J. W., Mol, B. W., & Bloemenkamp, K. (2014). Foley Catheter versus Vaginal Misoprostol: Randomized Controlled Trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature. American Journal of Perinatology, 31(2), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1341573

@article{6f3f32e20c504dd5b946ad1fb0b6fa06,

title = "Foley Catheter versus Vaginal Misoprostol: Randomized Controlled Trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature",

abstract = "Objectives To assess effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol for term induction of labor. Study DesignThis trial randomly allocated women with singleton term pregnancy to 30-mL Foley catheter or 25-g vaginal misoprostol tablets. Primary outcome was cesarean delivery rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time to birth. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted. ResultsFifty-six women were allocated to Foley catheter, 64 to vaginal misoprostol tablets. Cesarean delivery rates did not differ significantly (25% Foley versus 17% misoprostol; relative risk [RR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 2.94), with more cesarean deliveries due to failure to progress in the Foley group (14% versus 3%; RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.64). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable. Time from induction to birth was longer in the Foley catheter group (36 hours versus 25 hours; p",

keywords = "cervical ripening, labor induction, Foley catheter, misoprostol, prostaglandin E1, cesarean delivery rate",

author = "Marta Jozwiak and {ten Eikelder}, Mieke and Rengerink, {Katrien Oude} and {de Groot}, Christianne and Hanneke Feitsma and Marc Spaanderman and {van Pampus}, Marielle and {de Leeuw}, {Jan Willem} and Mol, {Ben Willem} and Kitty Bloemenkamp",

year = "2014",

month = feb,

doi = "10.1055/s-0033-1341573",

language = "English",

volume = "31",

pages = "145--155",

journal = "American Journal of Perinatology",

issn = "0735-1631",

publisher = "Thieme Medical Publishers",

number = "2",

}

Jozwiak, M, ten Eikelder, M, Rengerink, KO, de Groot, C, Feitsma, H, Spaanderman, M, van Pampus, M, de Leeuw, JW, Mol, BW & Bloemenkamp, K 2014, 'Foley Catheter versus Vaginal Misoprostol: Randomized Controlled Trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature', American Journal of Perinatology, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1341573

TY - JOUR

T1 - Foley Catheter versus Vaginal Misoprostol: Randomized Controlled Trial (PROBAAT-M Study) and Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Literature

AU - Jozwiak, Marta

AU - ten Eikelder, Mieke

AU - Rengerink, Katrien Oude

AU - de Groot, Christianne

AU - Feitsma, Hanneke

AU - Spaanderman, Marc

AU - van Pampus, Marielle

AU - de Leeuw, Jan Willem

AU - Mol, Ben Willem

AU - Bloemenkamp, Kitty

PY - 2014/2

Y1 - 2014/2

N2 - Objectives To assess effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol for term induction of labor. Study DesignThis trial randomly allocated women with singleton term pregnancy to 30-mL Foley catheter or 25-g vaginal misoprostol tablets. Primary outcome was cesarean delivery rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time to birth. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted. ResultsFifty-six women were allocated to Foley catheter, 64 to vaginal misoprostol tablets. Cesarean delivery rates did not differ significantly (25% Foley versus 17% misoprostol; relative risk [RR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 2.94), with more cesarean deliveries due to failure to progress in the Foley group (14% versus 3%; RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.64). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable. Time from induction to birth was longer in the Foley catheter group (36 hours versus 25 hours; p

AB - Objectives To assess effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol for term induction of labor. Study DesignThis trial randomly allocated women with singleton term pregnancy to 30-mL Foley catheter or 25-g vaginal misoprostol tablets. Primary outcome was cesarean delivery rate. Secondary outcomes were maternal and neonatal morbidity and time to birth. Additionally, a systematic review was conducted. ResultsFifty-six women were allocated to Foley catheter, 64 to vaginal misoprostol tablets. Cesarean delivery rates did not differ significantly (25% Foley versus 17% misoprostol; relative risk [RR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 2.94), with more cesarean deliveries due to failure to progress in the Foley group (14% versus 3%; RR 4.57, 95% CI 1.01 to 20.64). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable. Time from induction to birth was longer in the Foley catheter group (36 hours versus 25 hours; p

KW - cervical ripening

KW - labor induction

KW - Foley catheter

KW - misoprostol

KW - prostaglandin E1

KW - cesarean delivery rate

U2 - 10.1055/s-0033-1341573

DO - 10.1055/s-0033-1341573

M3 - Article

C2 - 23564065

SN - 0735-1631

VL - 31

SP - 145

EP - 155

JO - American Journal of Perinatology

JF - American Journal of Perinatology

IS - 2

ER -