Misoprostol Use vs Foley Catheter for Cervical Preparation before Surgical Management of Late Miscarriage
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70749/ijbr.v3i4.2098Keywords:
Misoprostol, Foley Catheter, Cervical Ripening, Late Miscarriage, Surgical ManagementAbstract
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of misoprostol and Foley catheter for cervical preparation before surgical management of late miscarriage, specifically evaluating the time to cervical dilation, surgical duration, and complication rates. Methodology: A retrospective study was conducted at Hayatabad Medical Complex, Peshawar, from October 2024 to March 2024, including 100 patients (50 in each group). The study analyzed demographic data, time to cervical dilation, surgical duration, and complications for both methods. Statistical analysis was performed using independent t-tests to compare the groups, with p-values of less than 0.05 considered significant. Results: The average time to cervical dilation for the misoprostol group was 6.5 hours (±2.1 hours), while the Foley catheter group had a mean time of 9.2 hours (±3.3 hours), with a statistically significant difference (p=0.022). Surgical duration was 37.8 minutes (±9.5 minutes) for misoprostol and 41.2 minutes (±10.3 minutes) for Foley catheter, with no significant difference (p=0.134). Complications were similar across both groups, with uterine hyperstimulation more common in the misoprostol group and cervical lacerations more frequent in the Foley catheter group. Conclusion: Misoprostol provides a faster time to cervical dilation compared to the Foley catheter, though both methods are safe and effective. This study supports the use of misoprostol for quicker cervical preparation, with recommendations for further research on combined methods and long-term outcomes.
Downloads
References
1. Chandrasekaran, S., Paul, M., Ruggiero, S., Monschauer, E., Blanchard, K., & Robinson, Y. (2021). Foley catheter and misoprostol for cervical preparation for second-trimester surgical abortion. Contraception, 104(4), 437-441.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2021.06.015
2. Atalla, E. (2022). Second trimester a abortion induction with misoprostol only versus misoprostol plus isosorbide mononitrate: A randomized controlled study. Al-Azhar International Medical Journal.
https://doi.org/10.21608/aimj.2022.123222.1846
3. Manly, E., Hiersch, L., Moloney, A., Berndl, A., Mei-Dan, E., Zaltz, A., Barrett, J., & Melamed, N. (2020). Comparing Foley catheter to prostaglandins for cervical ripening in multiparous women. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 42(7), 853-860.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2019.11.001
4. Banotra, P., & Rashid, A. (2022). Pre-induction cervical ripening: A prospective and comparative study of intra-cervical Foley’s catheter and prostaglandin E2 gel. International Journal of Research and Review, 9(1), 328-333.
https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20220139
5. Stock, S. J., Bhide, A., Richardson, H., Black, M., Yuill, C., Harkness, M., Reid, M., Wee, F., Cheyne, H., McCourt, C., Rana, D., Boyd, K. A., Sanders, J., Heera, N., Huddleston, J., Denison, F., Pasupathy, D., Modi, N., Smith, G., … Norrie, J. (2021). Cervical ripening at home or in-hospital—prospective cohort study and process evaluation (CHOICE) study: A protocol. BMJ Open, 11(5), e050452.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050452
6. Nwali, M. I., Agboeze, J., Obi, V. O., Ikeotuonye, A. C., Ugadu, I. O., & Ugwa, E. A. (2021). Cervical ripening for induction of labor: A randomized comparison between vaginal Misoprostol versus Foley’s catheter placement in a Nigeria tertiary hospital. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 11(03), 252-262.
https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2021.113024
7. Zhao, G., Song, G., & Liu, J. (2022). Safety and efficacy of double-balloon catheter for cervical ripening: A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 22(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-04988-2
8. Yin, J., Li, Y., Chen, Y., Wang, C., & Song, X. (2023). Intracervical Foley catheter plus intravaginal misoprostol compared to intravaginal misoprostol-only for cervical ripening: A systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 281, 76-84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.12.022
9. Shaheen, U., Yasmin, S., Liaqat, N., & Rafique, S. (2021). Manual vacuum aspiration (M.V.A) versus conventional evacuation and curettage in early pregnancy loss. Pakistan Journal of Medical and Health Sciences, 15(8), 2213-2215.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Indus Journal of Bioscience Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
