A Comparative Study between Intrauterine Foley’s Catheter Versus Foley’s with 100 ml of Extra-Amniotic Saline Infusion for Induction of Labour in Nulliparous with Unfavorable Cervix

Abstract

Objective: This study was performed to compare efficacy, mean time interval between induction and delivery and side effects like differences in caesarean rates, maternal and foetal morbidities like chorioamnionitis, uterine hyperstimulation, foetal and neonatal distress in intrauterine foley’s catheter versus foley’s with 100 ml of extra amniotic saline infusion used for induction of labour in nulliparous women with unfavourable cervix.
Material and Method: This comparative study was conducted on selected 100 women admitted in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, in a tertiary care hospital with term pregnancy divided into two groups, i.e., foley’s catheter alone group i.e., group A and foley’s catheter with extra amniotic saline infusion group i.e., group B consisting of 50 patients each.
Results: The mean duration from induction to active phase of labour for group A was 607.34 ± 200.60 min and for group B was 447.82 ± 130.70 min which was statistically significant. However, the mean duration between induction of labour to delivery in group A was 918.06 ± 301.76 minutes and group B was 820.86 ± 337.06 minutes which was statistically not significant. There was statistically significant rate of side effects including increased caesarean section rates in group B (84%) as compared to group A (60%).
Conclusion: While the use of extra amniotic saline infusion with a Foley ‘s catheter results in more rapid cervical ripening and a shorter duration from induction to the active phase of labor compared to the Foley’s catheter alone, it cannot be deemed superior. This is due to the lack of a significant difference in the mean induction-to-delivery interval, as well as a notable increase in side effects, including higher rates of cesarean deliveries.