Double balloon device compared to oxytocin for induction of labour after previous caesarean section

Estefanía Rodríguez Ferradas, Izaskun Lasa Alvarado, Miren Arrue Gabilondo, Irene Diez-Itza, José García-Adanez

Departament of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Asturias Central Hospital, Oviedo, Spain.
Departament of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Donostia Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain.

DOI: 10.4236/ojog.2013.31A039                

Abstract

Objective: To assess cervical changes, duration of oxytocin infusion, mode of delivery and complications after cervical ripening using a double balloon device in women with a previous caesarean section. Methods: Longitudinal study including 80 women with a previous caesarean section, no previous vaginal delivery and an unfavourable cervix (Bishop score < 4). Two groups were established: a double balloon device was used with 32 women (exposed) and not with the others (non-exposed) (48). Statistical analysis was performed by comparing means (Student’s t-test and Welch’s test or paired Student’s t-tests), or by comparing proportions (Chi square or Fisher’s tests). Results: The mean number of hours of oxytocin infusion was statistically significantly higher in the non-exposed group (14.09 ± 6.05 vs 9.78 ± 3.95; p < 0.001), and in the exposed group the Bishop score increased after removing the double balloon device (3.22 ± 2.03 vs 1.16 ± 1.30; p < 0.01). There were no significant differences in the mode of delivery, rates of intrapartum fever or chorioamnionitis. Conclusion: The double balloon device for cervical ripening prior to induction with oxytocin in women with a previous caesarean section improves Bishop scores without increasing the rates of complications and decreasing the time for which oxytocin is required.

Keywords

Double Balloon Device; Induction, Labor; Vaginal Birth after Caesarean; Cervical Ripening

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Martin, J.A., Hamilton, B.E., Sutton, P.D., et al. (2009) Births: Final data for 2006. National Vital Statistics Reports, 57.
[2]	Bishop, E.H. (1964) Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 24, 266-268.
[3]	American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist (2006) ACOG Committee opinion No. 342: Induction of labor for vaginal birth after caesarean delivery. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 108, 465-467. doi:10.1097/00006250-200608000-00045
[4]	Embry, M.O. and Mollison, B.G. (1967) The unfavourable cervix and induction of labour using a cervical balloon. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of the British Commonwealth, 74, 44-48. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1967.tb03931.x
[5]	SOGC (2005) SOGC clinical practice guidelines. Guidelines for vaginal birth after previous caesarean birth. Number 155. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 89, 319-331.
[6]	Boulvain, M., Kelly, A., Lohse, C., Stan, C. and Irion, O. (2001) Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 4.
[7]	Garcia-Adanez, J., Navarro, M., Larraza, M.J., Ibanez, L. and Goiri-Little, C. “Four hour rule” increases vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Advances in Perinatal Medicine, Monduzzi Editore, 2010.
[8]	Macones, G.A., Hankins, G.D.V., Spong, C.Y., Aut, J. and Moore, T. (2008) The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 112, 661-666. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181841395
[9]	Sherman, D., Frenkel, E., Tovbin, J., Arieli, S., Caspi, E. and Bukovsky, I. (1996) Ripening of the unfavorable cervix with extraamniotic catheter balloon: Clinical experience and review. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey, 51, 621-627. doi:10.1097/00006254-199610000-00022
[10]	Atad, J., Hallak, M., Ben-David, Y., Auslender, R. and Abramovici, H. (1997) Ripening and dilation of the unfavourable cervix for induction of labor by a double balloon device: Experience with 250 cases. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 104, 29-32. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb10644.x
[11]	Khotaba, S., Volfson, M., Tarazova, L., Odeh, M., Barenboym, R., Fait, V., et al. (2001) Induction of labor in women with previous cesarean section using the double balloon device. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 80, 1041-1042. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0412.2001.801114.x
[12]	Bujold, E., Blackwell, S.C. and Gauthieter, R.J. (2004) Cervical ripening with transcervical Foley catheter and the risk of uterine rupture. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 103, 18-23. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000109148.23082.C1
[13]	Ravasia, D.J., Wood, S.I. and Pollard, J.K. (2000) Uterine rupture during induced trial of labor among women with previous cesarean delivery. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 183, 1176-1179. doi:10.1067/mob.[phone]
[14]	Hoffman, M.K., Sciscione, A., Srinivasana, M., Shackerlford, P. and Ekbladh, L. (2004) Uterine rupture in patients with prior caesarean delivery: The impact of cervical ripening. American Journal of Perinatology, 21, 217-222. doi:10.1055/s-2004-828608
[15]	Atad, J., Hallak, M., Auslender, R., Porat-Packer, T., Zarfati, D. and Abramovici, H. (1996) A randomized comparison of prostaglandin E2, oxytocin, and the double-balloon device in inducing labor. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 87, 223-227. doi:10.1016/0029-7844(95)00389-4
[16]	Miller, T.D. and Davis, G. (2005) Use of the Atad catheter for the induction of labour in women who have had a previous Caesarean section—A case series. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 45, 325-327. doi:10.1111/j.1479-828X.2005.00421.x.