To compare the combination of intracervical Foley catheter and intravaginal misoprostol administration versus intravaginal misoprostol administration-only for cervical ripening. The Medline, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, PROSPERO, Scopus, and Cochrane Collaboration databases were searched systematically. Randomized controlled trials that included patients with a singleton viable fetus who underwent induction of labor that required cervical ripening with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop ≤ 6) were eligible for inclusion. Primary outcomes was time to delivery and rate of cesarean delivery. Thirteen trials with 2978 subjects met the inclusion criteria. There was no difference in the incidence of cesarean delivery between the two groups (RR, 0.90; 95 % CI, 0.72-1.14; I2 = 69 %). The combination group resulted in comparable time to delivery (MD -2.50 h; 95 % CI 0.38, -5.38; I2 = 97 %), shorter time to vaginal delivery (MD -3.49 h; 95 % CI -4.89, -2.09; I2 = 81 %), lower risk of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission (RR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.58-0.90, I2 = 0 %), meconium-stained fluid (RR 0.48, 95 % CI 0.31-0.73, I2 = 28 %), and tachysystole with fetal heart trace changes (RR 0.49, 95 % CI 0.27-0.86, I2 = 43 %), compared with intravaginal misoprostol-only group. There was no statistical difference in rates of terbutaline use, endometritis or chorioamnionitis between the two groups. The combination of intravaginal misoprostol with intracervical Foley catheter for cervical ripening is not associated with shorter time to delivery. However, the combination group shows significant difference in shorter time to vaginal delivery, NICU admission, meconium-stained fluid, and tachysystole with fetal heart trace changes.
Keywords: Cervical ripening; Foley catheter; Intracervical catheter; Meta-analysis; Misoprostol.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.