Tugging the Foley catheter balloon every three hours in induction of labor after one previous cesarean: a randomized controlled trial

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101579
Krishnan Yunesh MBBS, Aizura Syafinaz Ahmad Adlan MObGyn, Thai Ying Wong MRCOG, Farah Gan MObGyn, Mukhri Hamdan MObGyn, PhD, Peng Chiong Tan FRCOG, PhD
{"title":"Tugging the Foley catheter balloon every three hours in induction of labor after one previous cesarean: a randomized controlled trial","authors":"Krishnan Yunesh MBBS,&nbsp;Aizura Syafinaz Ahmad Adlan MObGyn,&nbsp;Thai Ying Wong MRCOG,&nbsp;Farah Gan MObGyn,&nbsp;Mukhri Hamdan MObGyn, PhD,&nbsp;Peng Chiong Tan FRCOG, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>BACKGROUND</h3><div>Induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery with an unripe cervix have an especially high risk for unplanned cesarean delivery and uterine rupture. Mechanical balloon ripening is often preferred over prostaglandin-based ripening during induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery, because uterine rupture has been associated with prostaglandin use. The transcervical Foley balloon can be dislodged past the ripened cervix and be retained comfortably in the vagina during passive placement. Tugging of the Foley catheter can be a noninvasive and tolerated method for timelier retrieval of the retained balloon; expediting discovery of a ripened cervix would permit an earlier follow-on amniotomy and oxytocin infusion, thereby hastening birth.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>This study aimed to evaluate the effect of tugging of the Foley balloon for 30 seconds every 3 hours during 12 hours of scheduled placement in comparison with standard care (no tugging) on the induction to birth interval and patient satisfaction.</div></div><div><h3>STUDY DESIGN</h3><div>This randomized controlled trial, conducted at a university hospital in Malaysia, recruited participants from April 2023 to March 2024. Eligible participants admitted for Foley balloon induction of labor who had 1 previous cesarean were recruited. After balloon insertion, participants were randomized to tugging or standard care. Following balloon displacement, a vaginal examination was performed to check the cervix. The examination findings then dictated the follow-on management of induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean according to standard practice. The primary outcomes were the induction (Foley insertion) to delivery interval and participants’ satisfaction with the birthing process. Secondary outcomes were largely derived from the core outcome set for trials on induction of labor. Based on a superiority hypothesis, it was calculated that a sample size of 126 would be required to detect a 4-hour reduction in the induction-to-delivery interval and a 1.5 point increase in the satisfaction score based on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale with the level of significance set at 0.05, power at 80%, and a 10% drop out rate. Comparative analyses using an intention-to-treat approach were conducted using <em>t</em> tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, chi square tests, and Fisher exact tests as appropriate.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>A total of 126 participants were randomized with 63 in each trial arm. The induction to birth interval was (mean ± standard deviation) 29.7±9.6 hours for those in the 3-hourly tugging group and 29.8±9.1 hours for those under standard care (<em>P</em>=.950), and maternal satisfaction with the induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery birth process, assessed using a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale, was (median [interquartile range]) 8 [7–9] and 8 [7–9] (<em>P</em>=.936), respectively. The cesarean delivery rate was 37 of 63 (59%) vs 41 of 63 (65%) (<em>P</em>=.238) for those in the tugging group vs standard care, and the main indication for unplanned cesarean delivery was failure to progress with an incidence of 24 of 37 (65%) and 24 of 41 (59%) (<em>P</em>=.914) for tugging vs standard care arms, respectively. Three-hourly tugging also did not shorten the interval from induction to balloon displacement, amniotomy, the start of oxytocin infusion, or the second stage of labor.</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSION</h3><div>Tugging the catheter every 3 hours during scheduled 12-hour Foley balloon placement for induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery did not hasten birth or improve patient satisfaction when compared with standard care.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":"7 2","pages":"Article 101579"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589933324003057","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

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery with an unripe cervix have an especially high risk for unplanned cesarean delivery and uterine rupture. Mechanical balloon ripening is often preferred over prostaglandin-based ripening during induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery, because uterine rupture has been associated with prostaglandin use. The transcervical Foley balloon can be dislodged past the ripened cervix and be retained comfortably in the vagina during passive placement. Tugging of the Foley catheter can be a noninvasive and tolerated method for timelier retrieval of the retained balloon; expediting discovery of a ripened cervix would permit an earlier follow-on amniotomy and oxytocin infusion, thereby hastening birth.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of tugging of the Foley balloon for 30 seconds every 3 hours during 12 hours of scheduled placement in comparison with standard care (no tugging) on the induction to birth interval and patient satisfaction.

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized controlled trial, conducted at a university hospital in Malaysia, recruited participants from April 2023 to March 2024. Eligible participants admitted for Foley balloon induction of labor who had 1 previous cesarean were recruited. After balloon insertion, participants were randomized to tugging or standard care. Following balloon displacement, a vaginal examination was performed to check the cervix. The examination findings then dictated the follow-on management of induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean according to standard practice. The primary outcomes were the induction (Foley insertion) to delivery interval and participants’ satisfaction with the birthing process. Secondary outcomes were largely derived from the core outcome set for trials on induction of labor. Based on a superiority hypothesis, it was calculated that a sample size of 126 would be required to detect a 4-hour reduction in the induction-to-delivery interval and a 1.5 point increase in the satisfaction score based on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale with the level of significance set at 0.05, power at 80%, and a 10% drop out rate. Comparative analyses using an intention-to-treat approach were conducted using t tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, chi square tests, and Fisher exact tests as appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 126 participants were randomized with 63 in each trial arm. The induction to birth interval was (mean ± standard deviation) 29.7±9.6 hours for those in the 3-hourly tugging group and 29.8±9.1 hours for those under standard care (P=.950), and maternal satisfaction with the induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery birth process, assessed using a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale, was (median [interquartile range]) 8 [7–9] and 8 [7–9] (P=.936), respectively. The cesarean delivery rate was 37 of 63 (59%) vs 41 of 63 (65%) (P=.238) for those in the tugging group vs standard care, and the main indication for unplanned cesarean delivery was failure to progress with an incidence of 24 of 37 (65%) and 24 of 41 (59%) (P=.914) for tugging vs standard care arms, respectively. Three-hourly tugging also did not shorten the interval from induction to balloon displacement, amniotomy, the start of oxytocin infusion, or the second stage of labor.

CONCLUSION

Tugging the catheter every 3 hours during scheduled 12-hour Foley balloon placement for induction of labor after 1 previous cesarean delivery did not hasten birth or improve patient satisfaction when compared with standard care.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在剖宫产后引产中每三小时牵拉一次 Foley 导管球囊:随机对照试验
背景:宫颈未成熟剖宫产后引产发生意外剖宫产和子宫破裂的风险特别高。在IOLAC期间,球囊机械成熟通常优于前列腺素,因为子宫破裂与前列腺素的使用有关。经宫颈Foley球囊可以移出成熟的宫颈,并在被动放置时舒适地保留在阴道内。拖拽Foley导管可以是一种非侵入性和耐受性的方法,可以更及时地取出保留的球囊;加速发现成熟的子宫颈,允许后续羊膜切开和催产素注入,从而加速分娩。目的:评价Foley气囊在引产间隔12小时内每3小时牵引30秒与标准护理(不牵引)的比较及患者满意度。方法:于2023年4月至2024年3月在马来西亚一所大学医院进行随机对照试验。招募了有过一次剖宫产史的接受Foley气囊引产的合格参与者。在气球插入后,参与者被随机分为拖拽组或标准治疗组。球囊移位后,行阴道检查检查宫颈。检查结果决定了按照惯例进行IOLAC的后续管理。主要结局是分娩间隔的诱导(Foley插入)和参与者对分娩过程的满意度。次要结局主要来自IOL试验的核心结局集(CROWN)。计算126个样本量,以覆盖诱导分娩间隔减少4小时,满意度评分增加1.5分,基于0-10数值评定量表,基于优势假设,显著性水平设置为0.05,功率为80%,退出率为10%。分析采用t检验、Mann-Whitney U检验、卡方检验和Fisher精确检验,以意向治疗为基础。结果:126名受试者被随机化;每个试验组63例。诱导分娩间隔(平均±标准差)分别为29.7±9.6小时和29.8±9.1小时p=0.950,采用0-10数值评定量表对IOLAC分娩过程的满意度分别为中位数[四分位数范围]8[7-9]和8[7-9]p=0.936。剖宫产率分别为37/63(59%)和41/63 (65%)p=0.238,无计划剖宫产的主要指征是进展失败,分别为24/37(65%)和24/41 (59%)p=0.914。三小时的牵拉也没有缩短从诱导到气囊移位、羊膜切开、开始催产素输注或第二阶段的间隔。结论:Foley气囊IOLAC计划放置12小时,与标准护理相比,每3小时拉一次导管并没有加速分娩或提高患者满意度。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
254
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG) is a highly esteemed publication with two companion titles. One of these is the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Maternal-Fetal Medicine (AJOG MFM), which is dedicated to the latest research in the field of maternal-fetal medicine, specifically concerning high-risk pregnancies. The journal encompasses a wide range of topics, including: Maternal Complications: It addresses significant studies that have the potential to change clinical practice regarding complications faced by pregnant women. Fetal Complications: The journal covers prenatal diagnosis, ultrasound, and genetic issues related to the fetus, providing insights into the management and care of fetal health. Prenatal Care: It discusses the best practices in prenatal care to ensure the health and well-being of both the mother and the unborn child. Intrapartum Care: It provides guidance on the care provided during the childbirth process, which is critical for the safety of both mother and baby. Postpartum Issues: The journal also tackles issues that arise after childbirth, focusing on the postpartum period and its implications for maternal health. AJOG MFM serves as a reliable forum for peer-reviewed research, with a preference for randomized trials and meta-analyses. The goal is to equip researchers and clinicians with the most current information and evidence-based strategies to effectively manage high-risk pregnancies and to provide the best possible care for mothers and their unborn children.
期刊最新文献
The Role of Incorporating Maternal-Fetal Medicine Physicians onto Labor and Delivery in Reducing Maternal Morbidity. Intrauterine vacuum and balloon tamponade devices have similar rates of postpartum hemorrhage control: a retrospective cohort study. Intravenous calcium during spinal anesthesia in preeclamptic women receiving magnesium therapy. Is it not Time to Propose a Maternal-Fetal Definition of Fetal Growth Restriction specifically Linked to Maternal Vascular Malperfusion of the Placenta. Letter to The Editor in response to "Oxytocin regimen used for induction of labor and pregnancy outcomes".
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1