International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Volume 88, Issue 3 , Pages 258-264, March 2005

Hyaluronidase versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening in high-risk term and post term pregnancies

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Received 27 May 2004; received in revised form 6 December 2004; accepted 7 December 2004.

Abstract 

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Foley catheter and hyaluronidase for cervical ripening.

Method

Randomized controlled trial where 140 pregnant women, with gestational age ≥37 weeks, indication for labor induction and an unripe cervix, were enrolled, allocated in two groups according to the method of cervical ripening before labor induction. Statistical analysis used Student's t-test, Mann–Whitney, Chi-square test, survival analysis, risk ratios and number needed to treat.

Results

Time of induction, dose of oxytocin and mode of delivery had better results in the Foley catheter group. Comfort with the method was higher in the hyaluronidase group.

Conclusions

Both methods were effective and safe for cervical ripening. The Foley catheter group experienced a shorter period of induction, required a lower dose of oxytocin and had higher vaginal delivery rates, while the women who used hyaluronidase declared greater comfort with the method.

Keywords: Cervical ripening, Foley catheter, Hyaluronidase, Labor induction

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0020-7292(04)00493-X

doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2004.12.006

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Volume 88, Issue 3 , Pages 258-264, March 2005