American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

2015

DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.10.064

|View full text |Cite

|

Sign up to set email alerts

|

18: Induction of labor at term with oral misoprostol or Foley catheter, the PROBAAT-II trial (NTR3466)

Mieke L.G. ten Eikelder¹,

Katrien Oude Rengerink²,

Marta Jozwiak³

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Results5

Citation Types

Supporting

0

Mentioning

10

Contrasting

0

Year Published

2019

2019

2023

2023

Publication Types

Select...

Article3

Relationship

Self Cite2

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 3 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

0

Mentioning

10

Contrasting

0

Order By: Relevance

“…Nine studies were multicentre studies (Edwards 2014c; Guinn 2000; Jozwiak 2012; Jozwiak 2013; Jozwiak 2014; Lokkegaard 2015; Mundle 2017; Sarreau 2016; ten Eikelder 2016), the remaining studies were single‐centre studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The included studies were conducted in the following countries: Australia (Henry 2013; Pennell 2009), Brazil (Filho 2002; Oliveira 2010, Canada (Lemyre 2006; Pineda Rivas 2016; St Onge 1995), Czech Republic (Roztocil 1998), China (Wang 2012; Wang 2014; Wu 2017; Yuen 1996), Denmark (Lokkegaard 2015; Lyndrup 1989; Lyndrup 1994), Egypt (Ahmed 2016; El Khouly 2017; Kandil 2012), Finland (Kruit 2016), France (Allouche 1993; Sarreau 2016;), India (Chavakula 2015; Dalui 2005; Deo 2012; Deshmukh 2011; Goonewardene 2014; Gunawardena 2012; Joshi 2016; Kuppulakshmi 2016; Laddad 2013; Lanka 2014; Meetei 2015; Mundle 2017; Sheikher 2009), Iran (Moini 2003; Niromanesh 2003; Roudsari 2011; Sharami 2005) Italy (Cromi 2011; Cromi 2012), Israel (Atad 1996; Barda 2018; Ophir 1992; Shechter‐Maor 2015; Salim 2011; Solt 2009), Jordan (Al‐Taani 2004; Khamaiseh 2012), the Netherlands (Jozwiak 2012; Jozwiak 2013; Jozwiak 2014; ten Eikelder 2016), Nigeria (Aduloju 2016; Garba 2016; Orhue 1995; Tabowei 2003), Norway (Haugland 2012), Pakistan (Husain 2017;…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Misoprostol tablets: Goonewardene 2014 (balloon size unknown); Kruit 2016 (50 cc to 60 cc); Mundle 2017 (30 cc); Saleem 2006 (40 cc to 50 cc); Sheikher 2009 (30 cc); Somirathne 2017 (60 cc);ten Eikelder 2016 (30 cc). misoprostol solution: Matonhodze 2003 (50 cc).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tan 2015 reported that the double balloons were provided by Cook medical. ten Eikelder 2016 received funding from Fonds Nuts Ohra. Wang 2014 received financial support of The People’s Liberation Army.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirty‐five studies declared no conflict of interest (Aduloju 2016; Ahmed 2016; Al‐Ibraheemi 2018; Amorosa 2017; Barda 2018; Chavakula 2015; Cromi 2012; Edwards 2014c; El Khouly 2017; Filho 2002; Garba 2016; Goonewardene 2014; Henry 2013; Hoppe 2016; Husain 2017; Jozwiak 2012; Jozwiak 2013; Jozwiak 2014; Kandil 2012; Kruit 2016; Laddad 2013; Lanka 2014; Lewis 1983; Lokkegaard 2015; Mackeen 2018; Meetei 2015; Noor 2015; Pennell 2009; Salim 2011; Shechter‐Maor 2015; Somirathne 2017;Tan 2015; ten Eikelder 2016; Wang 2014; Wu 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Mechanical methods for induction of labour

¹

,

²

,

³

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMechanical methods were the first methods developed to ripen the cervix and induce labour. During recent decades they have been substituted by pharmacological methods. Potential advantages of mechanical methods, compared with pharmacological methods may include reduction in side effects that could improve neonatal outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2001, last updated in 2012.ObjectivesTo determine the effectiveness and safety of mechanical methods for third trimester (> 24 weeks' gestation) induction of labour in comparison with prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) (vaginal and intracervical), low‐dose misoprostol (oral and vaginal), amniotomy or oxytocin.Search methodsFor this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth’s Trials Register, , the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (), and reference lists of retrieved studies (9 January 2018). We updated the search in March 2019 and added the search results to the awaiting classification section of the review.Selection criteriaClinical trials comparing mechanical methods used for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction with pharmacological methods.Mechanical methods include: (1) the introduction of a catheter through the cervix into the extra‐amniotic space with balloon insufflation; (2) introduction of laminaria tents, or their synthetic equivalent (Dilapan), into the cervical canal; (3) use of a catheter to inject fluid into the extra‐amniotic space (EASI).This review includes the following comparisons: (1) specific mechanical methods (balloon catheter, laminaria tents or EASI) compared with prostaglandins (different types, different routes) or with oxytocin; (2) single balloon compared to a double balloon; (3) addition of prostaglandins or oxytocin to mechanical methods compared with prostaglandins or oxytocin alone.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed risk of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsThis review update includes a total of 113 trials (22,373 women) contributing data to 21 comparisons. Risk of bias of trials varied. Overall, the evidence was graded from very‐low to moderate quality. All evidence was downgraded for lack of blinding and, for many comparisons, the effect estimates were too imprecise to make a valid judgement.Balloon versus vaginal PGE2: there may be little or no difference in vaginal deliveries not achieved within 24 hours (average risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.26; 7 studies; 1685 women; I² = 79%; low‐quality evidence) and there probably is little or no difference in caesarean sections (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09; 28 studies; 6619 women; moderate‐quality evidence) between induction of labour with a balloon catheter and vaginal PGE2. A balloon catheter probably reduces the risk of uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate (FHR) changes (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.67; 6 studies; 1966 ...

“…Nine studies were multicentre studies (Edwards 2014c; Guinn 2000; Jozwiak 2012; Jozwiak 2013; Jozwiak 2014; Lokkegaard 2015; Mundle 2017; Sarreau 2016; ten Eikelder 2016), the remaining studies were single‐centre studies.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The included studies were conducted in the following countries: Australia (Henry 2013; Pennell 2009), Brazil (Filho 2002; Oliveira 2010, Canada (Lemyre 2006; Pineda Rivas 2016; St Onge 1995), Czech Republic (Roztocil 1998), China (Wang 2012; Wang 2014; Wu 2017; Yuen 1996), Denmark (Lokkegaard 2015; Lyndrup 1989; Lyndrup 1994), Egypt (Ahmed 2016; El Khouly 2017; Kandil 2012), Finland (Kruit 2016), France (Allouche 1993; Sarreau 2016;), India (Chavakula 2015; Dalui 2005; Deo 2012; Deshmukh 2011; Goonewardene 2014; Gunawardena 2012; Joshi 2016; Kuppulakshmi 2016; Laddad 2013; Lanka 2014; Meetei 2015; Mundle 2017; Sheikher 2009), Iran (Moini 2003; Niromanesh 2003; Roudsari 2011; Sharami 2005) Italy (Cromi 2011; Cromi 2012), Israel (Atad 1996; Barda 2018; Ophir 1992; Shechter‐Maor 2015; Salim 2011; Solt 2009), Jordan (Al‐Taani 2004; Khamaiseh 2012), the Netherlands (Jozwiak 2012; Jozwiak 2013; Jozwiak 2014; ten Eikelder 2016), Nigeria (Aduloju 2016; Garba 2016; Orhue 1995; Tabowei 2003), Norway (Haugland 2012), Pakistan (Husain 2017;…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Misoprostol tablets: Goonewardene 2014 (balloon size unknown); Kruit 2016 (50 cc to 60 cc); Mundle 2017 (30 cc); Saleem 2006 (40 cc to 50 cc); Sheikher 2009 (30 cc); Somirathne 2017 (60 cc);ten Eikelder 2016 (30 cc). misoprostol solution: Matonhodze 2003 (50 cc).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tan 2015 reported that the double balloons were provided by Cook medical. ten Eikelder 2016 received funding from Fonds Nuts Ohra. Wang 2014 received financial support of The People’s Liberation Army.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thirty‐five studies declared no conflict of interest (Aduloju 2016; Ahmed 2016; Al‐Ibraheemi 2018; Amorosa 2017; Barda 2018; Chavakula 2015; Cromi 2012; Edwards 2014c; El Khouly 2017; Filho 2002; Garba 2016; Goonewardene 2014; Henry 2013; Hoppe 2016; Husain 2017; Jozwiak 2012; Jozwiak 2013; Jozwiak 2014; Kandil 2012; Kruit 2016; Laddad 2013; Lanka 2014; Lewis 1983; Lokkegaard 2015; Mackeen 2018; Meetei 2015; Noor 2015; Pennell 2009; Salim 2011; Shechter‐Maor 2015; Somirathne 2017;Tan 2015; ten Eikelder 2016; Wang 2014; Wu 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Mechanical methods for induction of labour

¹

,

²

,

³

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundMechanical methods were the first methods developed to ripen the cervix and induce labour. During recent decades they have been substituted by pharmacological methods. Potential advantages of mechanical methods, compared with pharmacological methods may include reduction in side effects that could improve neonatal outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2001, last updated in 2012.ObjectivesTo determine the effectiveness and safety of mechanical methods for third trimester (> 24 weeks' gestation) induction of labour in comparison with prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) (vaginal and intracervical), low‐dose misoprostol (oral and vaginal), amniotomy or oxytocin.Search methodsFor this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth’s Trials Register, , the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (), and reference lists of retrieved studies (9 January 2018). We updated the search in March 2019 and added the search results to the awaiting classification section of the review.Selection criteriaClinical trials comparing mechanical methods used for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction with pharmacological methods.Mechanical methods include: (1) the introduction of a catheter through the cervix into the extra‐amniotic space with balloon insufflation; (2) introduction of laminaria tents, or their synthetic equivalent (Dilapan), into the cervical canal; (3) use of a catheter to inject fluid into the extra‐amniotic space (EASI).This review includes the following comparisons: (1) specific mechanical methods (balloon catheter, laminaria tents or EASI) compared with prostaglandins (different types, different routes) or with oxytocin; (2) single balloon compared to a double balloon; (3) addition of prostaglandins or oxytocin to mechanical methods compared with prostaglandins or oxytocin alone.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed risk of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.Main resultsThis review update includes a total of 113 trials (22,373 women) contributing data to 21 comparisons. Risk of bias of trials varied. Overall, the evidence was graded from very‐low to moderate quality. All evidence was downgraded for lack of blinding and, for many comparisons, the effect estimates were too imprecise to make a valid judgement.Balloon versus vaginal PGE2: there may be little or no difference in vaginal deliveries not achieved within 24 hours (average risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.26; 7 studies; 1685 women; I² = 79%; low‐quality evidence) and there probably is little or no difference in caesarean sections (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09; 28 studies; 6619 women; moderate‐quality evidence) between induction of labour with a balloon catheter and vaginal PGE2. A balloon catheter probably reduces the risk of uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate (FHR) changes (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.67; 6 studies; 1966 ...

Mechanical methods for induction of labour

¹

,

²

,

³

et al. 2023

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis 39.4. Comparison 39 Any mechanical method and oxytocin versus low dose misoprostol alone: all women (not prespecified), Outcome 4 Serious neonatal morbidity/perinatal death.

Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour

¹

,

²

,

³

et al. 2021

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Product

Browser Extension Assistant by scite Citation Statement Search Reference Check Visualizations Dashboards Explore Journals Explore Organizations Explore Funders Embedding Badge Embedding Citation Search Pricing

Resources

Blog Help & FAQ Accessibility Statement API Terms For Universities & Governments For Researchers For Publishers For Corporate, Pharma & Enterprise Author Marketing Become an Affiliate Get an organization trial or quote scite Data & Services

About

News & Press Careers Read our Paper Coverage

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.