Controlled-release dinoprostone insert versus Foley catheter for labor induction: a meta-analysis

<i>Objective</i>: To compare the effectiveness and safety of controlled-release dinoprostone insert with Foley catheter balloon for cervical ripening and labor induction. <i>Methods</i>: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database were searched. Only randomized controlled trials comparing controlled-release dinoprostone insert with Foley catheter balloon were included. Risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. <i>Results</i>: Six studies were included with 731 women received dinoprostone insert and 722 Foley catheter. Time from induction to delivery was significantly shortened in dinoprostone insert group compared to Foley catheter group (MD 5.73 h, 95% CI 1.26–10.20). There were no significant differences in vaginal delivery within 24 h (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43–1.30) or cesarean section (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80–1.12) between two ripening methods. Dinoprostone insert was related with increased rate of excessive uterine contraction (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.03–0.19), but less oxytocin use (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.25–2.77) when compared with Foley catheter. <i>Conclusions</i>: Induction of labor with controlled-release dinoprostone insert seems to be more effective than Foley catheter. However, the former method causes excessive uterine contraction more frequently.