drugset / Trial / NCT04747301
DOuble-BAlloon Versus PROstaglandin E2 for Cervical Ripening in Low Risk Pregnancies
RandomizedParallel-groupOpen-labelTreatment
Summary
To compare the effectiveness and safety of double balloon catheter and vaginal insert Prostaglandin E2 in cervical ripening prior to Induction of Labor in low-risk women from 39+0 to 40+6 weeks of gestation.
Timeline
- Start
- 2021-08-01
- Primary completion
- 2025-08-01
- Completion
- 2025-12-31
Publications
- Background Du YM, Zhu LY, Cui LN, Jin BH, Ou JL. Double-balloon catheter versus prostaglandin E2 for cervical ripening and labour induction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BJOG. 2017 May;124(6):891-899. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14256. Epub 2016 Aug 17.
- Background Liu YR, Pu CX, Wang XY, Wang XY. Double-balloon catheter versus dinoprostone insert for labour induction: a meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 Jan;299(1):7-12. doi: 10.1007/s00404-018-4929-8. Epub 2018 Oct 12.
- Background de Vaan MD, Ten Eikelder ML, Jozwiak M, Palmer KR, Davies-Tuck M, Bloemenkamp KW, Mol BWJ, Boulvain M. Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 18;10(10):CD001233. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub3.
- Background Shechter-Maor G, Haran G, Sadeh-Mestechkin D, Ganor-Paz Y, Fejgin MD, Biron-Shental T. Intra-vaginal prostaglandin E2 versus double-balloon catheter for labor induction in term oligohydramnios. J Perinatol. 2015 Feb;35(2):95-8. doi: 10.1038/jp.2014.173. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
- Background Du C, Liu Y, Liu Y, Ding H, Zhang R, Tan J. Double-balloon catheter vs. dinoprostone vaginal insert for induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2015 Jun;291(6):1221-7. doi: 10.1007/s00404-014-3547-3. Epub 2014 Nov 19.
- Background Wang W, Zheng J, Fu J, Zhang X, Ma Q, Yu S, Li M, Hou L. Which is the safer method of labor induction for oligohydramnios women? Transcervical double balloon catheter or dinoprostone vaginal insert. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Nov;27(17):1805-8. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.880880. Epub 2014 Feb 3.
- Background Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Uccella S, Agosti M, Serati M, Marchitelli G, Bolis P. A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Aug;207(2):125.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.05.020. Epub 2012 Jun 1.
- Background Suffecool K, Rosenn BM, Kam S, Mushi J, Foroutan J, Herrera K. Labor induction in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix: double balloon catheter versus dinoprostone. J Perinat Med. 2014 Mar;42(2):213-8. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2013-0152.
- Background Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, Tita ATN, Silver RM, Mallett G, Hill K, Thom EA, El-Sayed YY, Perez-Delboy A, Rouse DJ, Saade GR, Boggess KA, Chauhan SP, Iams JD, Chien EK, Casey BM, Gibbs RS, Srinivas SK, Swamy GK, Simhan HN, Macones GA; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women. N Engl J Med. 2018 Aug 9;379(6):513-523. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1800566.
- Background Dos Santos F, Drymiotou S, Antequera Martin A, Mol BW, Gale C, Devane D, Van't Hooft J, Johnson MJ, Hogg M, Thangaratinam S. Development of a core outcome set for trials on induction of labour: an international multistakeholder Delphi study. BJOG. 2018 Dec;125(13):1673-1680. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.15397. Epub 2018 Sep 10.
Drugs
| Evaluation | Drug | Modality | Dose | Route |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subject | Dinoprostone | Other / unclassified | 10 mg | — |
Indications
No indication recorded.