386 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22012248)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. 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]
5. Comparison of intracervical and intravaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction in patients with an unfavourable cervix.
Srisomboon J; Piyamongkol W; Aiewsakul P
J Med Assoc Thai; 1997 Mar; 80(3):189-94. PubMed ID: 9175387
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Hill JB; Thigpen BD; Bofill JA; Magann E; Moore LE; Martin JN
Am J Perinatol; 2009 Jan; 26(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 18850516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A randomized trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter with concurrent oxytocin for labor induction in nulliparous women.
Culver J; Strauss RA; Brody S; Dorman K; Timlin S; McMahon MJ
Am J Perinatol; 2004 Apr; 21(3):139-46. PubMed ID: 15085496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. A randomized controlled trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter plus oxytocin for labor induction.
Moraes Filho OB; Albuquerque RM; Cecatti JG
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2010 Aug; 89(8):1045-52. PubMed ID: 20636243
[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 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]
11. 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]
12. Intravaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labor.
Afolabi BB; Oyeneyin OL; Ogedengbe OK
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2005 Jun; 89(3):263-7. PubMed ID: 15919393
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Intracervical Foley Catheter Plus Intravaginal Misoprostol vs Intravaginal Misoprostol Alone for Cervical Ripening: A Meta-Analysis.
Lee HH; Huang BS; Cheng M; Yeh CC; Lin IC; Horng HC; Huang HY; Lee WL; Wang PH
Int J Environ Res Public Health; 2020 Mar; 17(6):. PubMed ID: 32168947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A randomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy of different doses of intravaginal misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Saxena P; Puri M; Bajaj M; Mishra A; Trivedi SS
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci; 2011 Jul; 15(7):759-63. PubMed ID: 21780543
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. Comparative efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in labor induction at term: a randomized trial.
Ozkan S; Calişkan E; Doğer E; Yücesoy I; Ozeren S; Vural B
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2009 Jul; 280(1):19-24. PubMed ID: 19034471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Low dose intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical baloon catheter for pre-induction cervical ripening.
Tabowei TO; Oboro VO
East Afr Med J; 2003 Feb; 80(2):91-4. PubMed ID: 16167722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [Foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol for labour induction].
Panelius E; Heikinheimo O; Rahkonen L
Duodecim; 2012; 128(20):2093-102. PubMed ID: 23167168
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prospective randomised controlled trial to compare safety and efficacy of intravaginal Misoprostol with intracervical Cerviprime for induction of labour with unfavourable cervix.
Krithika KS; Aggarwal N; Suri V
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2008 Apr; 28(3):294-7. PubMed ID: 18569471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
