Cervical ripening with a double balloon device for 6 h in patients with a long cervix: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Rami Sammour, Elena Dikopoltsev, Shlomi Sagi, Dana Vitner, Inna Bleicher
{"title":"Cervical ripening with a double balloon device for 6 h in patients with a long cervix: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Rami Sammour, Elena Dikopoltsev, Shlomi Sagi, Dana Vitner, Inna Bleicher","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.15955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine whether cervical ripening with a double balloon device for 6 h is as effective as 12 h in patients with a cervical length ≥ 30 mm measured on transvaginal ultrasound before induction of labor, and to determine whether patients with a long cervix need to have the balloon placed for a longer time.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial that compared maternal and neonatal outcomes between women undergoing cervical ripening with a double balloon device for 6 h (study group) versus 12 h (control group). In this secondary analysis, we included only patients who had cervical length ≥ 30 mm measured on transvaginal ultrasound on admission. Our primary outcome was a Bishop score change after removal of the device. Secondary outcomes included insertion to delivery interval, mode of delivery, and oxytocin infusion duration.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixty-seven women met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis: 33 in the 6-h group and 34 in the 12-h group. Maternal characteristics were similar between both groups. Bishop score difference between the preinsertion and the postremoval scores were similar in the two groups (2.67 ± 1.8 vs. 2.53 ± 1.69, P = 0.76), while insertion to delivery time was 10 h shorter in the 6-h group (20.95 vs. 31.21, P = 0.02; mean difference, -10.26 [95% CI, -19.0 to -1.51]). The other secondary outcomes remained similar in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In women undergoing induction of labor who have a cervical length ≥ 30 mm measured on admission transvaginal ultrasound, removing a double balloon device after 6 h achieved similar Bishop score changes as removal after 12 h, but significantly reduced the time to delivery. REGISTRATION AT CLINICAL TRIALS: https://classic.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov/ct2/show/NCT03045939.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15955","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To examine whether cervical ripening with a double balloon device for 6 h is as effective as 12 h in patients with a cervical length ≥ 30 mm measured on transvaginal ultrasound before induction of labor, and to determine whether patients with a long cervix need to have the balloon placed for a longer time.

Methods: This is a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial that compared maternal and neonatal outcomes between women undergoing cervical ripening with a double balloon device for 6 h (study group) versus 12 h (control group). In this secondary analysis, we included only patients who had cervical length ≥ 30 mm measured on transvaginal ultrasound on admission. Our primary outcome was a Bishop score change after removal of the device. Secondary outcomes included insertion to delivery interval, mode of delivery, and oxytocin infusion duration.

Results: Sixty-seven women met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis: 33 in the 6-h group and 34 in the 12-h group. Maternal characteristics were similar between both groups. Bishop score difference between the preinsertion and the postremoval scores were similar in the two groups (2.67 ± 1.8 vs. 2.53 ± 1.69, P = 0.76), while insertion to delivery time was 10 h shorter in the 6-h group (20.95 vs. 31.21, P = 0.02; mean difference, -10.26 [95% CI, -19.0 to -1.51]). The other secondary outcomes remained similar in both groups.

Conclusion: In women undergoing induction of labor who have a cervical length ≥ 30 mm measured on admission transvaginal ultrasound, removing a double balloon device after 6 h achieved similar Bishop score changes as removal after 12 h, but significantly reduced the time to delivery. REGISTRATION AT CLINICAL TRIALS: https://classic.

Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT03045939.

宫颈过长患者使用双气囊装置催熟宫颈 6 小时:随机对照试验的二次分析。
目的研究引产前经阴道超声测量宫颈长度≥30 mm的患者使用双球囊装置催熟宫颈6小时与12小时是否同样有效,并确定宫颈过长的患者是否需要更长时间放置球囊:本研究是对一项随机对照试验数据的二次分析,该试验比较了使用双球囊装置催产 6 小时(研究组)与 12 小时(对照组)的产妇和新生儿结局。在这项二次分析中,我们只纳入了入院时经阴道超声测量宫颈长度≥30 毫米的患者。我们的主要结果是取出装置后 Bishop 评分的变化。次要结果包括插入到分娩的时间间隔、分娩方式和催产素输注持续时间:符合纳入标准并纳入分析的产妇有 67 名:6 小时组 33 名,12 小时组 34 名。两组产妇的特征相似。两组插入前和取出后的 Bishop 评分差异相似(2.67 ± 1.8 vs. 2.53 ± 1.69,P = 0.76),而 6 小时组从插入到分娩的时间缩短了 10 小时(20.95 vs. 31.21,P = 0.02;平均差异为-10.26 [95% CI,-19.0 至-1.51])。两组的其他次要结果相似:结论:对于入院经阴道超声测量宫颈长度≥30 mm的引产妇女,6 h后取出双球囊装置与12 h后取出双球囊装置可获得相似的Bishop评分变化,但可显著缩短分娩时间。临床试验注册:https://classic.Clinicaltrials: gov/ct2/show/NCT03045939。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信