ArticleCureus2023
Comparison of Vaginal Dinoprostone Pessary With Transcervical Balloon Catheter Plus Vaginal Misoprostol for Pre-induction Cervical Ripening: A Randomized Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical comparison of vaginal misoprostol combined with a foley balloon versus vaginal misoprostol alone for inducing labor: a prospective cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims and Objectives To compare the safety and efficacy of dinoprostone pessary with Foley plus vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening. Materials and Methods We randomized 115 women to the pessary or Foley plus misoprostol group. Pessary was inserted for 24 hours, and in the Foley plus misoprostol group, intravaginal misoprostol 25 mcg was administered along with trans-cervical Foley insertion and repeated every six hours to a maximum dose of 100 mcg. Singleton pregnancies requiring labor induction at more than 34 weeks with a Bishop score of <6 were included. Study outcomes included induction-delivery interval (IDI), mode of delivery, change in the Bishop score, need for oxytocin augmentation, and patient discomfort as assessed by visual analog score. Results The IDI was similar between the groups (pessary vs Foley plus misoprostol; 21.27 vs 21.10 hours, p = 0.9). The mean change in the Bishop score and need for augmentation with oxytocin was significantly more in the Foley plus misoprostol group compared to pessary (2.72 vs 1.94, p = 0.001; 89.7% vs 57.9%, p = 0.0001). Pessary was better tolerated compared to Foley plus misoprostol (VAS 7.8 vs 6.68, p = 0.0001). Mode of delivery and maternal and neonatal outcomes showed no difference. Conclusion There was no significant difference between pessary and Foley plus misoprostol in the IDI and mode of delivery. Pessary was better tolerated, and augmentation with oxytocin was required less often. Foley plus misoprostol caused a faster change in the Bishop score, but oxytocin augmentation was used more often. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.