Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?

To compare efficiency of a double-balloon to vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening in patients with unfavourable cervix. Fifty patients induced with a double-balloon were compared to 50 patients receiving vaginal prostaglandins. Matching criteria were age, parity, history of uterine scar, ges...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Gynécologie, obstétrique & fertilité obstétrique & fertilité, 2014-10, Vol.42 (10), p.674-680
Main Authors: Boyon, C, Monsarrat, N, Clouqueur, E, Deruelle, P
Format: Article
Language:fre
Subjects:
Administration, Intravaginal
Adult
Cervical Ripening - physiology
Cesarean Section - statistics & numerical data
Female
Gestational Age
Humans
Labor, Induced - instrumentation
Labor, Induced - methods
Pain Measurement
Patient Satisfaction
Pregnancy
Prostaglandins - administration & dosage
Treatment Outcome
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 680
container_issue 10
container_start_page 674
container_title Gynécologie, obstétrique & fertilité
container_volume 42
creator Boyon, C
Monsarrat, N
Clouqueur, E
Deruelle, P
description To compare efficiency of a double-balloon to vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening in patients with unfavourable cervix. Fifty patients induced with a double-balloon were compared to 50 patients receiving vaginal prostaglandins. Matching criteria were age, parity, history of uterine scar, gestational age and Bishop score. The primary outcome was failure induction. Secondary outcomes included improvement in Bishop score, ripening-to-delivery interval, caesarean section rate, maternal and neonatal morbidity. Risk of failed induction (16% in the double-balloon group vs. 14% in the prostaglandins group) and caesarean section rate (28% vs. 36%) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of favourable cervix and the time to obtain a better Bishop score were similar with the two methods. Maximal pain score during cervical ripening was significantly lower in the double-balloon group (P
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.07.035
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1611608636</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1611608636</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p141t-2532b45fef357b49cb646702565e3c0b0e1c8191d18f4011548726e3c097210d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1kM1Kw0AYRQdBbK2-gcgs3STON39J3IgU_6DgRsFdmEm-1CnTmThJCn17K9bVXdxz7uIScgUsBwb6dpOv99F2mHMGMmdFzoQ6IXModJVpXfIZOR-GDWNMV6I8IzOuuFSlZHPyucS0c43xNLkegwvrO-oGOn5hQmoCNe3OhNGskXYxUUPbOFmPmTXexxhoiwcZqQvUG3sAXGinZnQx3F-Q0874AS-PuSAfT4_vy5ds9fb8unxYZT1IGDOuBLdSddgJVVhZNVZLXTCutELRMMsQmhIqaKHsJANQsiy4_q2qggNrxYLc_O32KX5POIz11g0Nem8CxmmoQQNoVmqhD-j1EZ3sFtu6T25r0r7-f0P8AJaJX-8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1611608636</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Boyon, C ; Monsarrat, N ; Clouqueur, E ; Deruelle, P</creator><creatorcontrib>Boyon, C ; Monsarrat, N ; Clouqueur, E ; Deruelle, P</creatorcontrib><description>To compare efficiency of a double-balloon to vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening in patients with unfavourable cervix. Fifty patients induced with a double-balloon were compared to 50 patients receiving vaginal prostaglandins. Matching criteria were age, parity, history of uterine scar, gestational age and Bishop score. The primary outcome was failure induction. Secondary outcomes included improvement in Bishop score, ripening-to-delivery interval, caesarean section rate, maternal and neonatal morbidity. Risk of failed induction (16% in the double-balloon group vs. 14% in the prostaglandins group) and caesarean section rate (28% vs. 36%) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of favourable cervix and the time to obtain a better Bishop score were similar with the two methods. Maximal pain score during cervical ripening was significantly lower in the double-balloon group (P&lt;0.001). Ripening-to-delivery interval (30.4 h ± 15.6h vs. 28.9 h ± 20.5h) was not different between the two groups. There was no difference about maternal and neonatal outcomes. The double-balloon was as efficient as vaginal prostaglandins. The ripening-to-delivery interval was not different between the two groups. The main advantage of this device could be a better tolerance favourishing patient satisfaction.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1769-6682</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.07.035</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25245840</identifier><language>fre</language><publisher>France</publisher><subject>Administration, Intravaginal ; Adult ; Cervical Ripening - physiology ; Cesarean Section - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Female ; Gestational Age ; Humans ; Labor, Induced - instrumentation ; Labor, Induced - methods ; Pain Measurement ; Patient Satisfaction ; Pregnancy ; Prostaglandins - administration &amp; dosage ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Gynécologie, obstétrique &amp; fertilité, 2014-10, Vol.42 (10), p.674-680</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25245840$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boyon, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monsarrat, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clouqueur, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deruelle, P</creatorcontrib><title>Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?</title><title>Gynécologie, obstétrique &amp; fertilité</title><addtitle>Gynecol Obstet Fertil</addtitle><description>To compare efficiency of a double-balloon to vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening in patients with unfavourable cervix. Fifty patients induced with a double-balloon were compared to 50 patients receiving vaginal prostaglandins. Matching criteria were age, parity, history of uterine scar, gestational age and Bishop score. The primary outcome was failure induction. Secondary outcomes included improvement in Bishop score, ripening-to-delivery interval, caesarean section rate, maternal and neonatal morbidity. Risk of failed induction (16% in the double-balloon group vs. 14% in the prostaglandins group) and caesarean section rate (28% vs. 36%) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of favourable cervix and the time to obtain a better Bishop score were similar with the two methods. Maximal pain score during cervical ripening was significantly lower in the double-balloon group (P&lt;0.001). Ripening-to-delivery interval (30.4 h ± 15.6h vs. 28.9 h ± 20.5h) was not different between the two groups. There was no difference about maternal and neonatal outcomes. The double-balloon was as efficient as vaginal prostaglandins. The ripening-to-delivery interval was not different between the two groups. The main advantage of this device could be a better tolerance favourishing patient satisfaction.</description><subject>Administration, Intravaginal</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Cervical Ripening - physiology</subject><subject>Cesarean Section - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gestational Age</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Labor, Induced - instrumentation</subject><subject>Labor, Induced - methods</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Prostaglandins - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1769-6682</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo1kM1Kw0AYRQdBbK2-gcgs3STON39J3IgU_6DgRsFdmEm-1CnTmThJCn17K9bVXdxz7uIScgUsBwb6dpOv99F2mHMGMmdFzoQ6IXModJVpXfIZOR-GDWNMV6I8IzOuuFSlZHPyucS0c43xNLkegwvrO-oGOn5hQmoCNe3OhNGskXYxUUPbOFmPmTXexxhoiwcZqQvUG3sAXGinZnQx3F-Q0874AS-PuSAfT4_vy5ds9fb8unxYZT1IGDOuBLdSddgJVVhZNVZLXTCutELRMMsQmhIqaKHsJANQsiy4_q2qggNrxYLc_O32KX5POIz11g0Nem8CxmmoQQNoVmqhD-j1EZ3sFtu6T25r0r7-f0P8AJaJX-8</recordid><startdate>201410</startdate><enddate>201410</enddate><creator>Boyon, C</creator><creator>Monsarrat, N</creator><creator>Clouqueur, E</creator><creator>Deruelle, P</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201410</creationdate><title>Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?</title><author>Boyon, C ; Monsarrat, N ; Clouqueur, E ; Deruelle, P</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p141t-2532b45fef357b49cb646702565e3c0b0e1c8191d18f4011548726e3c097210d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>fre</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Administration, Intravaginal</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Cervical Ripening - physiology</topic><topic>Cesarean Section - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gestational Age</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Labor, Induced - instrumentation</topic><topic>Labor, Induced - methods</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Prostaglandins - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boyon, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Monsarrat, N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clouqueur, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deruelle, P</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Gynécologie, obstétrique &amp; fertilité</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boyon, C</au><au>Monsarrat, N</au><au>Clouqueur, E</au><au>Deruelle, P</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?</atitle><jtitle>Gynécologie, obstétrique &amp; fertilité</jtitle><addtitle>Gynecol Obstet Fertil</addtitle><date>2014-10</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>42</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>674</spage><epage>680</epage><pages>674-680</pages><eissn>1769-6682</eissn><abstract>To compare efficiency of a double-balloon to vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening in patients with unfavourable cervix. Fifty patients induced with a double-balloon were compared to 50 patients receiving vaginal prostaglandins. Matching criteria were age, parity, history of uterine scar, gestational age and Bishop score. The primary outcome was failure induction. Secondary outcomes included improvement in Bishop score, ripening-to-delivery interval, caesarean section rate, maternal and neonatal morbidity. Risk of failed induction (16% in the double-balloon group vs. 14% in the prostaglandins group) and caesarean section rate (28% vs. 36%) were similar in the two groups. The proportion of favourable cervix and the time to obtain a better Bishop score were similar with the two methods. Maximal pain score during cervical ripening was significantly lower in the double-balloon group (P&lt;0.001). Ripening-to-delivery interval (30.4 h ± 15.6h vs. 28.9 h ± 20.5h) was not different between the two groups. There was no difference about maternal and neonatal outcomes. The double-balloon was as efficient as vaginal prostaglandins. The ripening-to-delivery interval was not different between the two groups. The main advantage of this device could be a better tolerance favourishing patient satisfaction.</abstract><cop>France</cop><pmid>25245840</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.07.035</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1769-6682
ispartof Gynécologie, obstétrique & fertilité, 2014-10, Vol.42 (10), p.674-680
issn 1769-6682
language fre
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1611608636
source Elsevier
subjects Administration, Intravaginal
Adult
Cervical Ripening - physiology
Cesarean Section - statistics & numerical data
Female
Gestational Age
Humans
Labor, Induced - instrumentation
Labor, Induced - methods
Pain Measurement
Patient Satisfaction
Pregnancy
Prostaglandins - administration & dosage
Treatment Outcome
title Cervical ripening: is there an advantage for a double-balloon device in labor induction?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T16%3A45%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cervical%20ripening:%20is%20there%20an%20advantage%20for%20a%20double-balloon%20device%20in%20labor%20induction?&rft.jtitle=Gyn%C3%A9cologie,%20obst%C3%A9trique%20&%20fertilit%C3%A9&rft.au=Boyon,%20C&rft.date=2014-10&rft.volume=42&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=674&rft.epage=680&rft.pages=674-680&rft.eissn=1769-6682&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.07.035&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1611608636%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p141t-2532b45fef357b49cb646702565e3c0b0e1c8191d18f4011548726e3c097210d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1611608636&rft_id=info:pmid/25245840&rfr_iscdi=true