ArticleInternational journal of women's health2026
Double-Balloon Catheter Alone or Combined with Oxytocin, Dinoprostone, or Misoprostol for Labor Induction in Late- and Post-Term Pregnancies: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in International journal of women's health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and safety of double-balloon catheter (DBC) alone or combined with oxytocin, dinoprostone, or misoprostol for labor induction in late- and post-term pregnancies with unfavorable cervices. Patients and Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort study included 1022 women with singleton cephalic pregnancies at ≥41 weeks' gestation and a Bishop score ≤6 who underwent induction between November 2017 and February 2025. Women were managed with DBC alone (n=234), DBC plus oxytocin (n=246), DBC plus dinoprostone (n=238), or DBC plus misoprostol (n=304). The primary outcomes were induction-to-delivery interval, vaginal delivery within 24 hours, and delivery mode; secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal complications. Group comparisons, Kaplan-Meier analysis, and multivariable regression were performed. Results: Induction outcomes differed significantly among protocols. Time-to-event analysis showed the shortest median time to vaginal delivery with DBC plus misoprostol (14.9 hours) and the longest with DBC plus dinoprostone (19.4 hours). Vaginal delivery within 24 hours was most frequent with DBC plus misoprostol and DBC alone. DBC plus dinoprostone had the highest cesarean delivery rate. Maternal complications were more frequent with DBC plus misoprostol, particularly uterine hyperstimulation, intrapartum fever/clinical chorioamnionitis, postpartum atony, and blood transfusion. Neonatal outcomes were largely comparable, although umbilical artery pH was slightly lower in the DBC plus misoprostol group. Estimated fetal weight was the only independent predictor of cesarean delivery. Conclusion: Among DBC-based induction strategies, DBC plus misoprostol appeared most efficient but had a less favorable maternal safety profile. DBC plus oxytocin offered the most balanced effectiveness-safety profile, whereas DBC plus dinoprostone was associated with slower labor progression and less favorable operative outcomes. Protocol selection should be individualized according to maternal risk, urgency of delivery, and available intrapartum monitoring capacity.
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.