A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter


      We sought to compare the efficacy of a double-balloon transcervical catheter to that of a prostaglandin (PG) vaginal insert among women undergoing labor induction.

      Study Design

      In all, 210 women with a Bishop score ≤6 were assigned randomly to cervical ripening with either a double-balloon device or a PGE2 sustained-release vaginal insert. Primary outcome was vaginal delivery within 24 hours.


      The proportion of women who achieved vaginal delivery in 24 hours was higher in the double-balloon group than in the PGE2 group (68.6% vs 49.5%; odds ratio, 2.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.26–3.91). There was no difference in cesarean delivery rates (23.8% vs 26.2%; odds ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.47–1.65). Oxytocin and epidural analgesia were administered more frequently when a double-balloon device was used. Uterine tachysystole or hypertonus occurred more frequently in the PGE2 arm (9.7% vs 0%, P = .0007).


      The use of a double-balloon catheter for cervical ripening is associated with a higher rate of vaginal birth within 24 hours compared with a PGE2 vaginal insert.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Kelly A.J.
        • Malik S.
        • Smith L.
        • Kavanagh J.
        • Thomas J.
        Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labor at term.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009; (CD003101)
        • Boulvain M.
        • Kelly A.J.
        • Lohse C.
        • Stan C.M.
        • Irion O.
        Mechanical methods for induction of labor.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001; (CD001233)
        • Vaknin Z.
        • Kurzweil Y.
        • Sherman D.
        Foley catheter balloon vs locally applied prostaglandins for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review and metaanalysis.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 203: 418-429
        • National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)
        Induction of labor: clinical guideline no. 70.
        National Institute for Clinical Excellence, London2008
        • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
        ACOG committee on practice bulletins–obstetrics.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114: 386-397
        • Cromi A.
        • Ghezzi F.
        • Agosti M.
        • et al.
        Is transcervical Foley catheter actually slower than prostaglandins in ripening the cervix?.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 204: 338.e1-338.e7
        • Faul F.
        • Erdfelder E.
        • Lang A.-G.
        • Buchner A.
        G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.
        Behav Res Methods. 2007; 39: 175-191
        • Yuen P.M.
        • Pang H.Y.
        • Chung T.
        • Chang A.
        Cervical ripening before induction of labor in patients with an unfavorable cervix: a comparative randomized study of the Atad Ripener Device, prostaglandin E2 vaginal pessary, and prostaglandin E2 intracervical gel.
        Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996; 36: 291-295
        • Pennell C.E.
        • Henderson J.J.
        • O'Neill M.J.
        • McChlery S.
        • Doherty D.A.
        • Dickinson J.E.
        Induction of labor in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix: a randomized controlled trial comparing double and single balloon catheters and PGE2 gel.
        BJOG. 2009; 116: 1443-1452
        • World Health Organization, Department of Reproductive Health and Research
        WHO recommendations for induction of labor.
        World Health Organization, Geneva2011
        • Shetty A.
        • Burt R.
        • Rice P.
        • Templeton A.
        Women's perceptions, expectations and satisfaction with induced labor–a questionnaire-based study.
        Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005; 123: 56-61
        • Gibbins J.
        • Thomson A.M.
        Women's expectations and experiences of childbirth.
        Midwifery. 2001; 17: 302-313
        • Miller A.M.
        • Rayburn W.F.
        • Smith C.V.
        Patterns of uterine activity after intravaginal prostaglandin E2 during preinduction cervical ripening.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 165: 1006-1010
        • Wikland M.
        • Lindblom B.
        • Wiquist N.
        Myometrial response to prostaglandins during labor.
        Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1984; 17: 131-136
        • Atad J.
        • Hallak M.
        • Ben-David Y.
        • Auslender R.
        • Abramovici H.
        Ripening and dilatation of the unfavorable cervix for induction of labor by a double balloon device: experience with 250 cases.
        Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997; 104: 29-32
        • Salim R.
        • Zafran N.
        • Nachum Z.
        • Garmi G.
        • Kraiem N.
        • Shalev E.
        Single-balloon compared with double-balloon catheters for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 79-86
        • Jozwiak M.
        • Oude Rengerink K.
        • Benthem M.
        • et al.
        • PROBAAT Study Group
        Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labor at term (PROBAAT trial): an open-label, randomized controlled trial.
        Lancet. 2012; 378: 2095-2103