Effectiveness and safety of dinoprostona and cook’s balloon for labour induction in pregnants with small for gestational age fetuses

Jorge Duro Gómez, Marta Porras Lucena, Vendrell Aranda Celia María
{"title":"Effectiveness and safety of dinoprostona and cook’s balloon for labour induction in pregnants with small for gestational age fetuses","authors":"Jorge Duro Gómez, Marta Porras Lucena, Vendrell Aranda Celia María","doi":"10.15406/OGIJ.2020.11.00514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To compare the effectiveness (hours until delivery) and safety (rate of vaginal deliveries and caesarean sections, use of oxytocin and perinatal outcomes) of dinoprostone and Cook's balloon as a method of labor induction in pregnant women with fetuses with an estimated weight below the 10th percentile and normal Doppler. Methods: retrospective cohort review of pregnant women with small for gestational age fetuses and induced with both methods in Reina Sofía Hospital, Cordoba, Spain from 2014 to 2018. The main outcome was time until delivery. Descriptive characteristics, obstetric and perinatal outcomes were analyzed. 322 pregnant women were induced: 204 women were induced with Cook's balloon (CB) and 118 with dinoprostone (DIN). RESULTS: Dinoprostone decreases the time until delivery (28.86 vs. 24.32 hours with CB and DIN, respectively, p<0.0001) and the use of oxytocin (79.7% vs 54.2% in CB and DIN group; p<0,01), as compared to Cook's balloon. No differences were observed in the rate of caesarean sections and vaginal deliveries, as well as in perinatal results. Conclusion: DIN reduces the time to delivery compared to CB with a lower need for oxytocin. Moreover, without worse perinatal outcomes.","PeriodicalId":19389,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics & Gynecology International Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics & Gynecology International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15406/OGIJ.2020.11.00514","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness (hours until delivery) and safety (rate of vaginal deliveries and caesarean sections, use of oxytocin and perinatal outcomes) of dinoprostone and Cook's balloon as a method of labor induction in pregnant women with fetuses with an estimated weight below the 10th percentile and normal Doppler. Methods: retrospective cohort review of pregnant women with small for gestational age fetuses and induced with both methods in Reina Sofía Hospital, Cordoba, Spain from 2014 to 2018. The main outcome was time until delivery. Descriptive characteristics, obstetric and perinatal outcomes were analyzed. 322 pregnant women were induced: 204 women were induced with Cook's balloon (CB) and 118 with dinoprostone (DIN). RESULTS: Dinoprostone decreases the time until delivery (28.86 vs. 24.32 hours with CB and DIN, respectively, p<0.0001) and the use of oxytocin (79.7% vs 54.2% in CB and DIN group; p<0,01), as compared to Cook's balloon. No differences were observed in the rate of caesarean sections and vaginal deliveries, as well as in perinatal results. Conclusion: DIN reduces the time to delivery compared to CB with a lower need for oxytocin. Moreover, without worse perinatal outcomes.
迪诺prostona和库克气囊用于小胎龄胎儿引产的有效性和安全性
目的:比较迪诺前列酮和库克球囊作为引产方法对体重低于10%和多普勒正常胎儿的孕妇引产的有效性(分娩前小时数)和安全性(阴道分娩率和剖宫产率、催产素的使用和围产期结局)。方法:回顾性队列分析2014 - 2018年西班牙科尔多瓦Reina Sofía医院两种方法诱导的小于胎龄胎儿孕妇。主要的结果是交货前的时间。分析描述性特征、产科和围产期结局。322例孕妇采用库克气囊(CB)诱导204例,迪诺前列酮(DIN)诱导118例。结果:迪诺前列酮可缩短分娩时间(CB组28.86 h, DIN组24.32 h, p<0.0001)和催产素使用时间(CB组79.7%,DIN组54.2%);p< 0.01)。在剖腹产和阴道分娩的比率以及围产期结果方面没有观察到差异。结论:与CB相比,DIN缩短了分娩时间,对催产素的需求更低。此外,没有更糟糕的围产期结局。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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