Induction of labor with cervical ripening balloon associated with oral misoprostol: an observational study comparing sequential and concurrent administration.

IF 1 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Matteo Mancarella, Daniela Attianese, Giulia Moggio, Lorenzo Novara, Silvia Pecchio, Alessia Ambrogio, Roberta Covino, Francesca DE Chiesa, Luca Fuso, Luca G Sgro, Valentina E Bounous, Annamaria Ferrero
{"title":"Induction of labor with cervical ripening balloon associated with oral misoprostol: an observational study comparing sequential and concurrent administration.","authors":"Matteo Mancarella, Daniela Attianese, Giulia Moggio, Lorenzo Novara, Silvia Pecchio, Alessia Ambrogio, Roberta Covino, Francesca DE Chiesa, Luca Fuso, Luca G Sgro, Valentina E Bounous, Annamaria Ferrero","doi":"10.23736/S2724-606X.25.05735-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The association of cervical ripening balloons (CRB) and misoprostol for induction of labor (IoL) is frequently used, although there is poor evidence about the optimal timing and protocol for their combination. The aim of this study was to compare a concurrent and a sequential scheme for administration of oral misoprostol in association with CRB, in terms of mode and timing of delivery and rate of adverse events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an observational study comparing two consecutive cohorts of women with unfavorable cervix undergoing IoL by means of double-balloon CRB combined with oral misoprostol, with either a sequential scheme (retrospective cohort, N.=36) or a concurrent administration (prospective cohort, N.=30). The primary outcome was the rate of vaginal delivery (VD); secondary outcomes included the interval of time to labor and delivery and the incidence of maternal or perinatal complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The concurrent administration of misoprostol combined with CRB resulted in a similar rate of VD compared to the sequential scheme (63.9% vs. 76.7%, P=0.29). Both time to active labor (32.7±10.9 vs. 21.8±9.6 hours, P=0.001) and to vaginal delivery (34.0±12.6 vs. 25.3±10.2 hours, P=0.016) were shorter for concurrent misoprostol administration, resulting in a higher rate of VD within 24 hours (13.9% vs. 43.3%, P=0.01). The rate of maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Concurrent use of CRB and oral misoprostol might be preferable due to similar results in terms of mode of delivery, achieved in a shorter time with no increase in complications; further studies on larger populations will be needed to verify potential differences in CS rates and rare adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":18572,"journal":{"name":"Minerva obstetrics and gynecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-606X.25.05735-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The association of cervical ripening balloons (CRB) and misoprostol for induction of labor (IoL) is frequently used, although there is poor evidence about the optimal timing and protocol for their combination. The aim of this study was to compare a concurrent and a sequential scheme for administration of oral misoprostol in association with CRB, in terms of mode and timing of delivery and rate of adverse events.

Methods: This was an observational study comparing two consecutive cohorts of women with unfavorable cervix undergoing IoL by means of double-balloon CRB combined with oral misoprostol, with either a sequential scheme (retrospective cohort, N.=36) or a concurrent administration (prospective cohort, N.=30). The primary outcome was the rate of vaginal delivery (VD); secondary outcomes included the interval of time to labor and delivery and the incidence of maternal or perinatal complications.

Results: The concurrent administration of misoprostol combined with CRB resulted in a similar rate of VD compared to the sequential scheme (63.9% vs. 76.7%, P=0.29). Both time to active labor (32.7±10.9 vs. 21.8±9.6 hours, P=0.001) and to vaginal delivery (34.0±12.6 vs. 25.3±10.2 hours, P=0.016) were shorter for concurrent misoprostol administration, resulting in a higher rate of VD within 24 hours (13.9% vs. 43.3%, P=0.01). The rate of maternal and perinatal adverse outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Conclusions: Concurrent use of CRB and oral misoprostol might be preferable due to similar results in terms of mode of delivery, achieved in a shorter time with no increase in complications; further studies on larger populations will be needed to verify potential differences in CS rates and rare adverse events.

宫颈成熟球囊引产与口服米索前列醇相关:一项比较顺序和同时给药的观察性研究。
背景:宫颈成熟球囊(CRB)和米索前列醇联合用于引产(IoL)是经常使用的,尽管关于它们联合的最佳时机和方案的证据很少。本研究的目的是比较与CRB相关的口服米索前列醇并发和顺序给药方案,在给药方式和时间以及不良事件发生率方面。方法:这是一项观察性研究,比较两个连续队列的宫颈不良妇女,通过双球囊CRB联合口服米索前列醇进行人工晶状体植入术,顺序方案(回顾性队列,n =36)或同时给药(前瞻性队列,n =30)。主要结局是阴道分娩率(VD);次要结局包括分娩间隔时间和产妇或围产期并发症的发生率。结果:与序贯方案相比,米索前列醇联合CRB同时给药导致的VD率相似(63.9% vs. 76.7%, P=0.29)。同时使用米索前列醇的产妇到活产时间(32.7±10.9小时比21.8±9.6小时,P=0.001)和阴道分娩时间(34.0±12.6小时比25.3±10.2小时,P=0.016)均较短,导致24小时内VD发生率较高(13.9%比43.3%,P=0.01)。两组产妇和围产期不良结局发生率无显著差异。结论:CRB和口服米索前列醇同时使用可能是更可取的,因为在分娩方式方面的结果相似,在更短的时间内实现,没有增加并发症;需要对更大的人群进行进一步的研究,以验证CS率和罕见不良事件的潜在差异。
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
Minerva obstetrics and gynecology
Minerva obstetrics and gynecology OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
191
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信