767 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15762966)
1. Comparison of extraamniotic Foley catheter and intracervical prostaglandin E gel for preinduction cervical ripening.
Dalui R; Suri V; Ray P; Gupta I
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2005 Apr; 84(4):362-7. PubMed ID: 15762966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of intracervical Foley catheter used alone or combined with a single dose of dinoprostone gel for cervical ripening: a randomised study.
Chowdhary A; Bagga R; Jasvinder Kalra ; Jain V; Saha SC; Kumar P
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2019 May; 39(4):461-467. PubMed ID: 30747025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Preinduction cervical ripening techniques compared.
Greybush M; Singleton C; Atlas RO; Balducci J; Rust OA
J Reprod Med; 2001 Jan; 46(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 11209625
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Transcervical Foley catheter with and without extraamniotic saline infusion for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial.
Lin MG; Reid KJ; Treaster MR; Nuthalapaty FS; Ramsey PS; Lu GC
Obstet Gynecol; 2007 Sep; 110(3):558-65. PubMed ID: 17766600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A randomized trial of extra-amniotic saline infusion plus intracervical Foley catheter balloon versus prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel for ripening the cervix and inducing labor in patients with unfavorable cervices.
Rouben D; Arias F
Obstet Gynecol; 1993 Aug; 82(2):290-4. PubMed ID: 8336880
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Pre-induction cervical ripening: transcervical foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol.
Adeniji OA; Oladokun A; Olayemi O; Adeniji OI; Odukogbe AA; Ogunbode O; Aimakhu CO; Omigbodun AO; Ilesanmi AO
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2005 Feb; 25(2):134-9. PubMed ID: 15814391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of prostaglandin E2 tablets or Foley catheter for labour induction in grand multiparas.
Al-Taani MI
East Mediterr Health J; 2004; 10(4-5):547-53. PubMed ID: 16335645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Preinduction cervical ripening. A randomized trial of intravaginal misoprostol alone vs. a combination of transcervical Foley balloon and intravaginal misoprostol.
Rust OA; Greybush M; Atlas RO; Jones KJ; Balducci J
J Reprod Med; 2001 Oct; 46(10):899-904. PubMed ID: 11725734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Comparison of changes in pre-induction cervical factors' scores following ripening with transcervical foley catheter and intravaginal misoprostol.
Adeniji AO; Olayemi O; Odukogbe AA; Aimakhu CO; Oladokun A; Akindele FO; Adeniji OI; Omigbodun AO; Ilesanmi AO
Afr J Med Med Sci; 2005 Dec; 34(4):377-82. PubMed ID: 16752669
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison between vaginal misoprostol and cervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Neiger R; Greaves PC
Tenn Med; 2001 Jan; 94(1):25-7. PubMed ID: 11194687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Labor induction in women with an unfavorable Bishop score: randomized controlled trial of intrauterine Foley catheter with concurrent oxytocin infusion versus Foley catheter with extra-amniotic saline infusion with concurrent oxytocin infusion.
Guinn DA; Davies JK; Jones RO; Sullivan L; Wolf D
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Jul; 191(1):225-9. PubMed ID: 15295370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Extraamniotic saline infusion is promising in preparing the cervix for induction of labor.
Hemlin J; Möller B
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 1998 Jan; 77(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 9492717
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Induction of labor in prolonged pregnancy with unfavorable cervix: comparison of sequential intracervical Foley catheter-intravaginal misoprostol and intravaginal misoprostol alone.
Ande AB; Ezeanochie CM; Olagbuji NB
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2012 Apr; 285(4):967-71. PubMed ID: 22012248
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A randomized controlled trial of 24-hour vaginal dinoprostone pessary compared to gel for induction of labor in term pregnancies with a Bishop score < or = 4.
Triglia MT; Palamara F; Lojacono A; Prefumo F; Frusca T
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2010 May; 89(5):651-7. PubMed ID: 20199360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Efficacy and safety of six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone: a randomized controlled trial.
Denguezli W; Trimech A; Haddad A; Hajjaji A; Saidani Z; Faleh R; Sakouhi M
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2007 Aug; 276(2):119-24. PubMed ID: 17219155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Unsucessful labour induction in women with unfavourable cervical scores: predictors and management.
Caliskan E; Dilbaz S; Gelisen O; Dilbaz B; Ozturk N; Haberal A
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol; 2004 Dec; 44(6):562-7. PubMed ID: 15598298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Randomised trial of intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labour.
Owolabi AT; Kuti O; Ogunlola IO
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2005 Aug; 25(6):565-8. PubMed ID: 16234141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Combining medical and mechanical methods of cervical ripening. Does it increase the likelihood of successful induction of labor?
Sullivan CA; Benton LW; Roach H; Smith LG; Martin RW; Morrison JC
J Reprod Med; 1996 Nov; 41(11):823-8. PubMed ID: 8951132
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Preinduction cervical ripening with the Foley catheter and the risk of subsequent preterm birth.
Sciscione A; Larkin M; O'Shea A; Pollock M; Hoffman M; Colmorgen G
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2004 Mar; 190(3):751-4. PubMed ID: 15042009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Elective cervical ripening in women beyond the 290th day of pregnancy: a randomized trial comparing 2 dinoprostone preparations.
Facchinetti F; Venturini P; Fazzio M; Volpe A
J Reprod Med; 2007 Oct; 52(10):945-9. PubMed ID: 17977171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
