Comparison of the efficacy of intra-cervical foley’s catheter balloon with PGE2 gel in pre-induction cervical ripening

Fareed Perveena, Mahajan Neha, Siraj Farhana


Background: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of intracervical Foleys catheter and intracervical PGE2 gel in preinduction cervical ripening.

Methods: This randomized, prospective study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College Srinagar from Mar 2011- Mar 2013. Total 200 patients at term with a Bishop’s score <3 with various indications for induction were taken and randomly allocated to receive intracervical Foleys catheter (100pts) or PGE2 gel (100pts). After 6 hours post induction, bishop’s score was assessed. Various parameters noted were change in Bishop Score, induction delivery interval, mode of delivery fetal outcome and maternal complications.  Statistical analysis was done using chi square test and t-test.

Results: The groups were comparable with respect to maternal age, gestational age, indication of induction and preinduction bishop’s score. Both the groups showed significant change in the bishop’s score, 5.3+1.1 &5.1+1.1for Foleys catheter and PGE2 gel, respectively (p<0.001); however the difference between the two groups was not significant.14 cesarean sections (14%) were performed in group A and 20(20%) were performed in group B (NS). The induction to delivery interval was 15.34+5.3 h in group A and 14.2+5.2 h in group B (p= 0.29). Apgar score, birth weight, NICU admissions and maternal side effects showed no difference between the two groups.

Conclusions: This study shows that both Foleys catheter and PGE2 gel are equally effective in pre induction cervical ripening.


Cervical ripening, PGE2 gel, Foleys catheter

Full Text:



Induction and Augmentation of Labour. ACOG. Tech. Bull. 1987:110:1-33.

Induction and augmentation of Labour. William’s obstetrics. Mc graw Hill. 2005;21:470-9.

F. Gary Cunningham, Kenneth J. Leveno, Steven L. Bloom, John C. Hauth, Dwight J. Rouse, Catherine Y. Spong. Labour Induction. William’s obstetrics. McGraw Hill. 2005;23:500.

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD et al. Births: final data for 2007. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2010;58(24):1-125.

Leppert PC. Anatomy and physiology of cervical ripening. Clin obstet Gynecol. 1995;67-279.

Chandrachakul B, Herabutya Y, Punyavachira P. Randomized trial of isosorbode mononitrite versus misoprostol for cervical ripening at term. (Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002;78:139-45.

Chwalisz K, Garfield RE. Role of nitric oxide in the uterus and cervix: implications for management of labour. (J Perinat Med. 1998;26:448-57.

Lewis GJ. Cervical ripening before induction of labour with PGE2 pessares or a foley catheter. J Obstet Gynecol (Bristol). 1983;3:1973.

St Onge RD, Connors GT. Pre-induction cervical ripening; a comparison of intracervical PGE2 gel vs. the Foleys catheter. Am J obstet ad gynecol. 1995;172:687-90.

National institute for clinical excellence. Clinical guidelines for induction of labor. Appendix-E London. NICE. 2001.

Anthony C, Sciscione DO, Helen M. A comparative randomized comparison of Foleys catheter insertion vs intracervical PGE2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening. Am J obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:55-9.

Deshmukh VL, Yelikar KA, Deshmukh AB. Comparative study of intracervical Foleys catheter and PGE2 gel for pre induction ripening. The journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India. 2011;61(4):418-21.

Jabbar T, Faiqa I, Kouser R. The comparison of cervical Foleys catheter and prostaglandin E2 at term. Professional med J. 2011;18(2):201-7.

Dewan FA, Ara M, Begum A. Foleys catheter versus prostaglandin E2 for induction of labor.Singapore journal of obstet and gynaecol. 2001;32(3):56-63.