Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 
 Español 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - (CIANE)

Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website)
Currently 3108 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=2814

Created on : 26 Nov 2017
Modified on : 26 Nov 2017

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Hard

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

A randomised controlled trial of intravaginal dinoprostone, intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical balloon catheter for labour induction - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology - Vol. 115, 11 - p.1443-1450

Author(s) :

Prager, M.; Eneroth-Grimfors, E.; Edlund, M.; Marions, L.

Year of publication :

2008

URL(s) :

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.…
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01843.x

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of induction of labour by vaginal application of dinoprostone or misoprostol or transcervical insertion of a balloon (Bard) catheter. Design: A non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial. Setting: A tertiary level Swedish hospital. Population: A total of 592 women who had undergone full-term pregnancies, not previously been subjected to a caesarean section, and required induction of labour for common, routine indications. Methods: Women were randomly assigned to induction of labour using intravaginal dinoprostone (2 mg once every 6 hours) or misoprostol (25 micrograms once every 4 hours) or a transcervical balloon catheter. Main outcome measures: The time interval between induction to delivery in general and vaginal delivery in particular, the mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal parameters of outcome. Results: Of the 588 subjects included in the final intention-to-treat analysis, 191 were assigned to treatment with dinoprostone, 199 with misoprostol and 198 with the balloon catheter. The shortest mean induction-to-delivery interval was obtained with the catheter (12.9 hours versus 16.8 and 17.3 hours for dinoprostone and misoprostol, respectively). The efficacies of the two prostaglandins were similar. The maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with each of the three procedures were similar. Conclusions: Induction of labour with a transcervical balloon catheter is effective and safe and can be recommended as the first choice. The two prostaglandins, dinoprostone and misoprostol, were shown to be equally effective and safe, while misoprostol costs significantly less and is easier to store. © 2008 The Authors.

Sumário (português)  :

Resumen (español)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Argumento (español):

Keywords :

➡ induction of labor ; misoprostol (Cytotec)

Author of this record :

Import 26/11/2017 — 26 Nov 2017

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms (read guidelines)

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth