Abstract:Background: Induction of labor (IOL) with mechanical methods or pharmacological agents is used in about 20% to 30% of all pregnant women. We specialized in comparing the effectiveness and safety of dinoprostone vs transcervical Foley catheter for IOL in term pregnant women with an unfavorable cervix with adequate samples. Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of dinoprostone vs transcervical Foley catheter for IOL in term pregnant women with an unfavorable cervix. Study design: This is a parallel, open-label randomized controlled trial in two maternal centers in Shanghai, China between October 2019 and July 2022. Women with a singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation at term and an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score <6) scheduled for IOL were eligible. A total of 1860 women were randomly allocated to cervical ripening with either a dinoprostone vaginal insert (10 mg) or a 60 cc Foley catheter for up to 24 hours. The primary outcomes were vaginal delivery rate and time to vaginal delivery. Secondary outcomes included time to delivery and maternal and neonatal morbidity. Analysis was done from an intention-to-treat perspective. The trial was registered with the China trial registry (CTR2000038435). Results: The vaginal birth rates were 72.8% (677/930) vs 69.9% (650/930) in vaginal dinoprostone and Foley catheter, respectively (aRR 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-1.10, risk difference: 0.03). Time to vaginal delivery was not significantly different between the two groups (sub-distribution hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.99-1.24). Vaginal dinoprostone was more likely complicated with hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate changes (5.8% vs 2.8%, aRR 2.09, 95% CI 1.32-3.31) and placenta abruption (0.9% vs 0.1%, aRR: 8.04, 95% CI 1.01-64.15), while Foley catheter was more likely complicated with suspected intrapartum infection (5.1% vs 8.2%, aRR: 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.88) and postpartum infection (1.4% vs 3.7%, aRR: 0.38, 95% CI 0.20-0.72). The composite of poor neonatal outcomes was not significantly different between the two groups (4.5% vs 3.8%, aRR 1.21, 95% CI 0.78-1.88), while more neonatal asphyxia occurred in the dinoprostone group (1.2% vs 0.2%, aRR 5.39, 95% CI 1.22-23.92). In a subgroup analysis, vaginal dinoprostone decreased vaginal birth rate slightly in multiparous women (90.6% vs 97.0%, aRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.99). Conclusions: In term pregnant women with an unfavorable cervix, IOL with vaginal dinoprostone or Foley catheter has similar effectiveness. Foley catheter leads to better safety for neonates, while it may result in a higher risk of maternal infection. Furthermore, Foley catheter should be preferred in multiparous women.

Comparison of outcomes of labor induction with dinoprostone vaginal insert (PROPESS) and double balloon cook catheter in term nulliparous pregnancies

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Pregnancy Outcomes of Labor Induction with Dinoprostone or Single-Balloon Catheter in Term Nulliparous Women with Borderline Oligohydramnios

Comparison of the efficacy between controlled-release dinoprostone delivery system (PROPESS) and Cook's double balloon catheter plus oxytocin: A retrospective single-center study in Japan

Double-balloon catheter vs. dinoprostone vaginal insert for induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix

Effectiveness and Safety of the Double Intracervical Balloon vs Dinoprostone in Patients with Previous Cesarean Section

Dinoprostone pessary for labor induction in Chinese patients with premature rupture of membranes at term: A retrospective cohort

Vaginal dinoprostone insert compared with two different oral misoprostol regimens for labor induction in nulliparous and multiparous women

Vaginal dinoprostone vs Foley catheter for induction of labor at term with an unfavorable cervix: an open-label randomized controlled trial

Comparison of labor duration of induced labor with dinoprostone insert vs spontaneous labor

Effectiveness and safety of dinoprostone insert for labor induction in women with different cervical maturity

A Control Study of the COOK Balloon Catheter and Prostaglandin E2 Suppositories in Induction of Labor at Term

Misoprostol versus prostaglandin E2 gel for labor induction in premature rupture of membranes after 34 weeks of pregnancy

Use of vaginal dinoprostone for women with term prelabor rupture of membranes and an unfavorable cervix within 6 h versus within 6-24 h

Efficacy Evaluation of Controlled-Release Dinoprostone Vaginal Suppositories for Induction of Prolonged Pregnancy

Cervical Ripening Agent Dinoprostone for Delivery Induction in Late Pregnancy Mothers: Experiences of 685 Cases.

Comparison of two labor induction regimens with intravaginal misoprostol 25 μg and adverse perinatal outcomes

Trans-cervical Foley Catheter Balloon Versus Vaginal Prostaglandin E2 Suppository for Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labor: a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical study on the three methods of using dinoprostone to induce labor with term pregnancy.

Vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: An individual participant data meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials

Cervical ripening balloon compared with vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening in obese women at term: A prospective cohort study

Clinical effects of Cook® cervical ripening balloon on promoting cervical dilation for early termination of pregnancy in high-risk parturients.