Base de datos - (CIANE) | |
Presentación de esta base de datos documental (Sitio web de CIANE) |
https://ciane.net/id=2814 | ➡ Editar este registro |
Ficha bibliográfica (sin autores) : | A randomised controlled trial of intravaginal dinoprostone, intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical balloon catheter for labour induction - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology - Vol. 115, 11 - p.1443-1450 |
Autores : | Prager, M.; Eneroth-Grimfors, E.; Edlund, M.; Marions, L. |
Año de publicación : | 2008 |
URL(s) : | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.… |
Résumé (français) : |
|
Abstract (English) : | Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of induction of labour by vaginal application of dinoprostone or misoprostol or transcervical insertion of a balloon (Bard) catheter. Design: A non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial. Setting: A tertiary level Swedish hospital. Population: A total of 592 women who had undergone full-term pregnancies, not previously been subjected to a caesarean section, and required induction of labour for common, routine indications. Methods: Women were randomly assigned to induction of labour using intravaginal dinoprostone (2 mg once every 6 hours) or misoprostol (25 micrograms once every 4 hours) or a transcervical balloon catheter. Main outcome measures: The time interval between induction to delivery in general and vaginal delivery in particular, the mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal parameters of outcome. Results: Of the 588 subjects included in the final intention-to-treat analysis, 191 were assigned to treatment with dinoprostone, 199 with misoprostol and 198 with the balloon catheter. The shortest mean induction-to-delivery interval was obtained with the catheter (12.9 hours versus 16.8 and 17.3 hours for dinoprostone and misoprostol, respectively). The efficacies of the two prostaglandins were similar. The maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with each of the three procedures were similar. Conclusions: Induction of labour with a transcervical balloon catheter is effective and safe and can be recommended as the first choice. The two prostaglandins, dinoprostone and misoprostol, were shown to be equally effective and safe, while misoprostol costs significantly less and is easier to store. © 2008 The Authors. |
Sumário (português) : |
|
Resumen (español) : | |
Comentarios : | |
Argument (français) : |
|
Argument (English): |
|
Argumento (português): |
|
Argumento (español): | |
Palabras claves : | |
Autor de este registro : | Import 26/11/2017 — 26 Nov 2017 |
Debate (mostrar sólo español) | ||
---|---|---|
Realizar otra consulta de expertos --- Realice otra consulta sencilla
Creación de un registro --- Importación de registros
Gestión de usuarios --- Salvaguardar la base de datos --- Contacto
Esta base de datos creada por la Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) está gestionada
por el Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
Se nutre de las contribuciones de voluntarios interesados en compartir información científica.
Si está de acuerdo con este proyecto, puede ayudarnos de varias maneras:
(1) convertirse en colaborador de esta base de datos, si tiene alguna experiencia en documentación
(2) ou apoio financeiro CIANE (veja abaixo)
(3) o hacerse miembro de otra asociación afiliada al CIANE.
➡ Inicie sesión o cree una cuenta para seguir los cambios o convertirse en editor.
➡ Contacta con bibli(arobase)ciane.net para más información.
Donar a CIANE (haga clic en 'Faire un don') nos ayudará a mantener y desarrollar sitios y bases de datos públicas para apoyar las decisiones informadas de los progenitores y profesionales de la salud con respecto al parto |