School of Medicine, University of Central Lancashire, 135A Adelphi St, Preston PR1 7BH, UK.
UCL Partners, 3 rd floor, 170 Tottenham Court Road, London W1T 7HA, UK.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023 Aug;287:80-92. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.05.037. Epub 2023 Jun 3.
A systematic review to determine the efficacy and safety of prostaglandins (PG) and Foley catheter (FC) for cervical priming in the outpatient setting. Various methods are available to achieve cervical ripening prior to induction of labour (IOL). In this systematic review, we will report the literature to date, and investigate the efficacy and safety of using the Foley catheter balloon or prostaglandins for cervical ripening, comparing both methods with each other, and discuss the implications of these findings for midwifery led units.
English peer-reviewed journals were systematically searched in the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, EMCARE, EMBASE and CINAHL, for studies investigating cervical ripening using the FC or PGs. Additional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs were identified by a manual search. Search terms included: cervix dilatation effacement, cervix ripening, outpatient, ambulatory care, obstetric patients, pharmacological preparations, and Foley catheter. Only RCTs of FC versus PG or either intervention versus placebo or intervention in the in-patient Vs. outpatient setting were included. 15 RCTs were included.
The results of this review show that both FC and PG analogues are equally effective cervical ripening agents. When compared to FC, PGs lead to a reduced requirement for oxytocin augmentation and a shorter intervention to delivery interval. However, PG use is also associated with an increased risk of hyperstimulation, cardiotocographic monitoring abnormalities and negative neonatal outcomes.
FC cervical ripening is an effective method of outpatient cervical priming, which is safe, acceptable, and cost-effective and thus has a potential role in both resource-rich and resource-poor countries. With appropriate dosing, some PG analogues also appear to offer similar outcomes.
本系统评价旨在确定前列腺素(PG)和 Foley 导管(FC)在门诊环境下用于宫颈预处理的疗效和安全性。有多种方法可用于在引产(IOL)前使宫颈成熟。在本系统评价中,我们将报告迄今为止的文献,并研究使用 Foley 导管球囊或前列腺素进行宫颈成熟的疗效和安全性,将这两种方法相互比较,并讨论这些发现对助产士主导单位的意义。
系统检索了 PubMed、MEDLINE、EMCARE、EMBASE 和 CINAHL 等英文同行评议期刊,以查找使用 FC 或 PG 进行宫颈成熟的研究。通过手动搜索还确定了其他随机对照试验(RCT)和非 RCT。检索词包括:宫颈扩张消退、宫颈成熟、门诊、门诊护理、产科患者、药理制剂和 Foley 导管。仅纳入了 FC 与 PG 或任何干预措施与安慰剂或住院与门诊环境下干预措施的 RCT。共纳入了 15 项 RCT。
本评价的结果表明,FC 和 PG 类似物都是同样有效的宫颈成熟剂。与 FC 相比,PG 可减少催产素增强的需求,并缩短干预至分娩的间隔。然而,PG 的使用也与过度刺激、胎心监护异常和新生儿不良结局的风险增加有关。
FC 宫颈成熟是一种有效的门诊宫颈预处理方法,安全、可接受且具有成本效益,因此在资源丰富和资源匮乏的国家都具有潜在的作用。在适当的剂量下,一些 PG 类似物似乎也能提供类似的结果。