球囊导管、口服米索前列醇或两者联合用于晚期和产后无产妇女宫颈成熟的比较:一项芬兰随机对照多中心先导试验。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Heidi Kruit, Katariina Place, Kirsi Väyrynen, Maija-Riitta Orden, Aydin Tekay, Marja Vääräsmäki, Jukka Uotila, Kati Tihtonen, Kirsi Rinne, Kaarin Mäkikallio, Seppo Heinonen, Leena Rahkonen
{"title":"球囊导管、口服米索前列醇或两者联合用于晚期和产后无产妇女宫颈成熟的比较:一项芬兰随机对照多中心先导试验。","authors":"Heidi Kruit,&nbsp;Katariina Place,&nbsp;Kirsi Väyrynen,&nbsp;Maija-Riitta Orden,&nbsp;Aydin Tekay,&nbsp;Marja Vääräsmäki,&nbsp;Jukka Uotila,&nbsp;Kati Tihtonen,&nbsp;Kirsi Rinne,&nbsp;Kaarin Mäkikallio,&nbsp;Seppo Heinonen,&nbsp;Leena Rahkonen","doi":"10.1111/aogs.15034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Nulliparous women beyond term have high rates of induction failure. The aim of this study was to compare delivery outcomes for balloon catheter, misoprostol, and combination of both in nulliparous late- and post-term women with unfavorable cervices. We intended to explore whether the combination strategy has lower cesarean section rate and is as safe as either method alone.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Material and Methods</h3>\n \n <p>The randomized multicenter pilot trial was carried out in the five university hospitals and the largest secondary care hospital of Finland March 1, 2018–March 31, 2022. A total of 273 nulliparous women with viable singleton fetus in cephalic presentation, intact amniotic membranes, and an unfavorable cervix at 41 + 0 gestational weeks were included. The study protocol was registered in the ISCTN registry (ISRCTN83219789). The women were randomized into cervical ripening by balloon catheter, oral misoprostol 50 μg every 4 h, or the combination use of both. The primary outcomes of the study were the rates of cesarean section and composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (5-min Apgar score &lt;7, umbilical artery pH ≤7.05, or NICU admission).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Ninety-seven women (35.5%) were allocated in the balloon catheter arm, 94 (34.4%) in the oral misoprostol arm, and 82 (30.0%) in the combination treatment arm. The rates of cesarean section (balloon catheter 23.7%, <i>n</i> = 23/97, vs. oral misoprostol 24.5%, <i>n</i> = 23/94, vs. combination 17.1%, <i>n</i> = 14/82) or composite adverse neonatal outcome (7.2% vs. 7.4% vs. 7.3%, respectively) were not statistically significantly different between the groups. The median (interquartile range) induction to delivery interval was the shortest in the combination treatment, 21.7 (15.1–33.2) h compared to balloon catheter 31.7 (21.9–44.5) h; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01 or oral misoprostol 37.0 (26.7–60.3) h; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01. The proportion of women with induction to delivery interval ≤24 h was significantly higher in the combination arm compared to balloon catheter (54.4% vs. 31.1%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) or oral misoprostol (54.4% vs. 21.1%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Our findings confirm the effectiveness of combining balloon catheter and oral misoprostol for cervical ripening, showing shorter induction to delivery interval and comparable rates of cesarean section and neonatal outcomes compared to either method alone. These results advocate for a shift toward adopting combination strategy in the induction of nulliparous late- and post-term women.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":6990,"journal":{"name":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","volume":"104 2","pages":"389-399"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782065/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of balloon catheter, oral misoprostol, or combination of both for cervical ripening in late-term and post-term nulliparous women: A Finnish randomized controlled multicenter pilot trial\",\"authors\":\"Heidi Kruit,&nbsp;Katariina Place,&nbsp;Kirsi Väyrynen,&nbsp;Maija-Riitta Orden,&nbsp;Aydin Tekay,&nbsp;Marja Vääräsmäki,&nbsp;Jukka Uotila,&nbsp;Kati Tihtonen,&nbsp;Kirsi Rinne,&nbsp;Kaarin Mäkikallio,&nbsp;Seppo Heinonen,&nbsp;Leena Rahkonen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aogs.15034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Introduction</h3>\\n \\n <p>Nulliparous women beyond term have high rates of induction failure. The aim of this study was to compare delivery outcomes for balloon catheter, misoprostol, and combination of both in nulliparous late- and post-term women with unfavorable cervices. We intended to explore whether the combination strategy has lower cesarean section rate and is as safe as either method alone.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Material and Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>The randomized multicenter pilot trial was carried out in the five university hospitals and the largest secondary care hospital of Finland March 1, 2018–March 31, 2022. A total of 273 nulliparous women with viable singleton fetus in cephalic presentation, intact amniotic membranes, and an unfavorable cervix at 41 + 0 gestational weeks were included. The study protocol was registered in the ISCTN registry (ISRCTN83219789). The women were randomized into cervical ripening by balloon catheter, oral misoprostol 50 μg every 4 h, or the combination use of both. The primary outcomes of the study were the rates of cesarean section and composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (5-min Apgar score &lt;7, umbilical artery pH ≤7.05, or NICU admission).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Ninety-seven women (35.5%) were allocated in the balloon catheter arm, 94 (34.4%) in the oral misoprostol arm, and 82 (30.0%) in the combination treatment arm. The rates of cesarean section (balloon catheter 23.7%, <i>n</i> = 23/97, vs. oral misoprostol 24.5%, <i>n</i> = 23/94, vs. combination 17.1%, <i>n</i> = 14/82) or composite adverse neonatal outcome (7.2% vs. 7.4% vs. 7.3%, respectively) were not statistically significantly different between the groups. The median (interquartile range) induction to delivery interval was the shortest in the combination treatment, 21.7 (15.1–33.2) h compared to balloon catheter 31.7 (21.9–44.5) h; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01 or oral misoprostol 37.0 (26.7–60.3) h; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01. The proportion of women with induction to delivery interval ≤24 h was significantly higher in the combination arm compared to balloon catheter (54.4% vs. 31.1%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01) or oral misoprostol (54.4% vs. 21.1%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Our findings confirm the effectiveness of combining balloon catheter and oral misoprostol for cervical ripening, showing shorter induction to delivery interval and comparable rates of cesarean section and neonatal outcomes compared to either method alone. These results advocate for a shift toward adopting combination strategy in the induction of nulliparous late- and post-term women.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6990,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\"104 2\",\"pages\":\"389-399\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11782065/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aogs.15034\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/aogs.15034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:足月以上无产妇女引产失败率高。本研究的目的是比较球囊导管、米索前列醇以及两者联合使用在无产晚期和足月妇女中不良服务的分娩结果。我们的目的是探讨联合策略是否具有较低的剖宫产率,以及是否与单独使用任何一种方法一样安全。材料与方法:随机多中心试验于2018年3月1日至2022年3月31日在芬兰五所大学医院和最大的二级保健医院进行。本研究共纳入273例41 + 0孕周的无产妇女,她们有活的单胎胎儿头位,羊膜完整,宫颈不适宜。研究方案已在ISCTN注册中心注册(ISRCTN83219789)。这些妇女被随机分为球囊导管、每4 h口服米索前列醇50 μg或两者联合使用。研究的主要结局是剖宫产率和新生儿不良结局的综合(5分钟Apgar评分)。结果:球囊导管组97例(35.5%),口服米索前列醇组94例(34.4%),联合治疗组82例(30.0%)。剖宫产率(球囊导管23.7%,n = 23/97,口服米索前列醇24.5%,n = 23/94,联合用药17.1%,n = 14/82)和新生儿综合不良结局(7.2%,7.4%,7.3%)组间差异无统计学意义。联合治疗诱导至分娩间隔的中位数(四分位间距)最短,为21.7 (15.1-33.2)h,而球囊导管为31.7 (21.9-44.5)h;结论:我们的研究结果证实了球囊导管和口服米索前列醇联合用于宫颈成熟的有效性,与单独使用任何一种方法相比,诱导分娩间隔更短,剖宫产率和新生儿结局相当。这些结果提倡转向采用联合策略诱导无产晚期和产后妇女。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison of balloon catheter, oral misoprostol, or combination of both for cervical ripening in late-term and post-term nulliparous women: A Finnish randomized controlled multicenter pilot trial

Comparison of balloon catheter, oral misoprostol, or combination of both for cervical ripening in late-term and post-term nulliparous women: A Finnish randomized controlled multicenter pilot trial

Introduction

Nulliparous women beyond term have high rates of induction failure. The aim of this study was to compare delivery outcomes for balloon catheter, misoprostol, and combination of both in nulliparous late- and post-term women with unfavorable cervices. We intended to explore whether the combination strategy has lower cesarean section rate and is as safe as either method alone.

Material and Methods

The randomized multicenter pilot trial was carried out in the five university hospitals and the largest secondary care hospital of Finland March 1, 2018–March 31, 2022. A total of 273 nulliparous women with viable singleton fetus in cephalic presentation, intact amniotic membranes, and an unfavorable cervix at 41 + 0 gestational weeks were included. The study protocol was registered in the ISCTN registry (ISRCTN83219789). The women were randomized into cervical ripening by balloon catheter, oral misoprostol 50 μg every 4 h, or the combination use of both. The primary outcomes of the study were the rates of cesarean section and composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (5-min Apgar score <7, umbilical artery pH ≤7.05, or NICU admission).

Results

Ninety-seven women (35.5%) were allocated in the balloon catheter arm, 94 (34.4%) in the oral misoprostol arm, and 82 (30.0%) in the combination treatment arm. The rates of cesarean section (balloon catheter 23.7%, n = 23/97, vs. oral misoprostol 24.5%, n = 23/94, vs. combination 17.1%, n = 14/82) or composite adverse neonatal outcome (7.2% vs. 7.4% vs. 7.3%, respectively) were not statistically significantly different between the groups. The median (interquartile range) induction to delivery interval was the shortest in the combination treatment, 21.7 (15.1–33.2) h compared to balloon catheter 31.7 (21.9–44.5) h; p < 0.01 or oral misoprostol 37.0 (26.7–60.3) h; p < 0.01. The proportion of women with induction to delivery interval ≤24 h was significantly higher in the combination arm compared to balloon catheter (54.4% vs. 31.1%; p < 0.01) or oral misoprostol (54.4% vs. 21.1%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Our findings confirm the effectiveness of combining balloon catheter and oral misoprostol for cervical ripening, showing shorter induction to delivery interval and comparable rates of cesarean section and neonatal outcomes compared to either method alone. These results advocate for a shift toward adopting combination strategy in the induction of nulliparous late- and post-term women.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
180
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Published monthly, Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica is an international journal dedicated to providing the very latest information on the results of both clinical, basic and translational research work related to all aspects of women’s health from around the globe. The journal regularly publishes commentaries, reviews, and original articles on a wide variety of topics including: gynecology, pregnancy, birth, female urology, gynecologic oncology, fertility and reproductive biology.
×
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