418
Views
14
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Making cervical ripening EASI: a prospective controlled comparison of single versus double balloon catheters

, , &
Pages 1765-1770 | Received 21 Oct 2013, Accepted 29 Dec 2013, Published online: 03 Feb 2014

Keep up to date with the latest research on this topic with citation updates for this article.

Read on this site (2)

Kara K. Hoppe, Melissa A. Schiff, Suzanne E. Peterson & Michael G. Gravett. (2016) 30 mL Single- versus 80 mL double-balloon catheter for pre-induction cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 29:12, pages 1919-1925.
Read now
Asnat Walfisch, Elad Mei-Dan & Mordechai Hallak. (2015) Trans-cervical double balloon catheter with and without extra-amniotic saline infusion for cervical ripening: a prospective quasi-randomized trial. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 28:7, pages 848-853.
Read now

Articles from other publishers (12)

Kenji Imai, Yuki Nozaki, Takafumi Ushida, Sho Tano, Hiroaki Kajiyama & Tomomi Kotani. (2023) Comparison of the efficacy between controlled‐release dinoprostone delivery system ( PROPESS ) and Cook's double balloon catheter plus oxytocin: A retrospective single‐center study in Japan . Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 49:9, pages 2317-2323.
Crossref
Marieke DT de Vaan, Mieke LG ten Eikelder, Marta Jozwiak, Kirsten R Palmer, Miranda Davies-Tuck, Kitty WM Bloemenkamp, Ben Willem J Mol & Michel Boulvain. (2023) Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2023:7.
Crossref
Xiyao Liu, Yu Wang, Fan Zhang, Xiaoni Zhong, Rong Ou, Xin Luo & Hongbo Qi. (2019) Double- versus single-balloon catheters for labour induction and cervical ripening: a meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 19:1.
Crossref
Marieke DT de Vaan, Mieke LG ten Eikelder, Marta Jozwiak, Kirsten R Palmer, Miranda Davies-Tuck, Kitty WM Bloemenkamp, Ben Willem J Mol & Michel Boulvain. (2019) Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2019:10.
Crossref
Héctor Lajusticia, Samuel J. Martínez-Domínguez, Gonzalo R. Pérez-Roncero, Peter Chedraui & Faustino R. Pérez-López. (2018) Single versus double-balloon catheters for the induction of labor of singleton pregnancies: a meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 297:5, pages 1089-1100.
Crossref
Fang Yang, Shijin Huang, Yu Long & Lingling Huang. (2018) Double-balloon versus single-balloon catheter for cervical ripening and labor induction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 44:1, pages 27-34.
Crossref
Atsushi Yanaihara. (2017) Single Balloon Aberration into the Uterus despite no Rupture of the Fetal Membranes: A Case Report. Obstetrics & Gynecology International Journal 8:3.
Crossref
Samia Husain, Sonia Husain & Rubina Izhar. (2017) Retracted: Oral misoprostol alone versus oral misoprostol and Foley's catheter for induction of labor: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 43:8, pages 1270-1277.
Crossref
Sven Kehl, Christel Weiss & Werner Rath. (2016) Balloon catheters for induction of labor at term after previous cesarean section: a systematic review. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 204, pages 44-50.
Crossref
G. Ducarme, J. Grange & M. Vital. (2016) Utilisation des ballonnets de dilatation cervicale en obstétrique. Journal de Gynécologie Obstétrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 45:2, pages 112-119.
Crossref
Saja Anabusi, Elad Mei-Dan, Mordechai Hallak & Asnat Walfisch. (2015) Mechanical labor induction in the obese population: a secondary analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 293:1, pages 75-80.
Crossref
Rany Harara, Ahmed Ibrahim, Ayman Abdel Razek Aboul nour, Yasser Moustafa & Waleed Khalaf. (2015) Double balloon silicon catheter versus misoprostol vaginal insert for preinduction cervical ripening. Evidence Based Womenʼs Health Journal 5:1, pages 1-8.
Crossref

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.