Obstetrics and Gynecology
maryam dehghan; tajosadat alameh; Zahra Allameh; zahra Seyed-Hoseini
Volume 8, Issue 2 , March and April 2023, , Pages 113-119
Abstract
Background & Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol with Foley balloon catheter for cervical ripening in women with singleton pregnancies and an unfavorable cervix.Materials & Methods: Eighty pregnant women with unfavorable cervix were randomly ...
Read More
Background & Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol with Foley balloon catheter for cervical ripening in women with singleton pregnancies and an unfavorable cervix.Materials & Methods: Eighty pregnant women with unfavorable cervix were randomly divided in two groups of Foley catheter or misoprostol modes. Cervical ripening in Foley catheter group was done with transcervical Foley catheter 18, and in misoprostol group with 25 μg single dose vaginal misoprostol (The maximum allowed dose for patients was 6 doses.). Bishop score, Apgar score, active phase duration, stage 2 duration and insertion to delivery interval were the main outcomes.Results: The mean time of ripening and the active phase in vaginal misoprostol group was significantly shorter than in Foley catheter group (2.32 versus 5.11 hours respectively, P-value = 0.0001). After intervention, Bishop score in vaginal misoprostol group was significantly more than Foley catheter group (8.70 versus 6.68 respectively, P-value = 0.0001). Insertion to delivery interval in vaginal misoprostol group was 9.54 hours and in Foley catheter group was 12.88 hours (P-value = 0.0001). The hospitalization time in Foley catheter group was significantly more than vaginal misoprostol group (P-value = 0.0001). The other outcomes were similar between groups.Conclusion: By the decreasing in the total time from insertion to birth, vaginal misoprostol was more effective than Foley catheter, as a cervical ripening method in our study.
Maternal Fetal Medicine
Tajossadat Allameh; Zahra Allameh; Zahra Javanmardi; Elham Moazam; Maryam Dehghan
Volume 8, Issue 2 , March and April 2023, , Pages 131-136
Abstract
Background & Objective: Due to the uncertainties of maternal and neonatal complications after delivery and the lack of similar studies in this regard, this study aimed to compare the maternal and fetal complications of vaginal birth after C-Section (VBAC), natural delivery and repeat Cesarean ...
Read More
Background & Objective: Due to the uncertainties of maternal and neonatal complications after delivery and the lack of similar studies in this regard, this study aimed to compare the maternal and fetal complications of vaginal birth after C-Section (VBAC), natural delivery and repeat Cesarean section in Isfahan province.Materials & Methods: In this one-year descriptive cross-sectional study, 49889 pregnant women who had the natural childbirth (29631 deliveries), elective repeat Cesarean section (20148 deliveries) and VBAC delivery (110 deliveries) were enrolled, then maternal and neonatal complications were compared in three groups.Results: There was a significant difference between the three groups based on the maternal and neonatal outcome, Apgar scores in the first and fifth minutes after delivery and the need for resuscitation at birth (P <0.05). Neonatal outcome was better in natural delivery and then VBAC compared to repeat C-section, respectively. Maternal outcome was better in VBAC and then repeat C-section than the natural childbirth. Apgar scores in the first and fifth minute were better in VBAC, and later natural delivery than repeat C-section. Resuscitation at birth demonstrated better results for natural delivery and then VBAC than repeat C-section.Conclusion: Utilizing VBAC and natural delivery have better maternal and fetal outcomes compared to C-section, along with being more satisfactory and safer.
