Osmotic dilators vs. Foley balloons: Bayesian secondary analyses of the DILAFOL trial.
J Matern Fetal Neonatal MedJul 8, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchObstetrics & Gynecology
Antonio F Saad, Elenir B C Avritscher, Claudia Pedroza et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This study conducted secondary Bayesian analyses of the DILAFOL randomized controlled trial, which included 419 parturients at ≥37 weeks' gestation. It found that synthetic osmotic dilators had an 89% probability of reducing cesarean deliveries compared to Foley balloons, with a mean absolute risk difference of -5.0%. The analysis also indicated favorable cost-effectiveness for osmotic dilators.
Key findings
- Synthetic osmotic dilators had an 89% probability of reducing cesarean delivery rates compared to Foley balloons.
- Mean total obstetric cost per patient was $10,198 for osmotic dilators versus $10,176 for Foley balloons.
- The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of osmotic dilators was $439 per cesarean delivery prevented.
- Economic benefits were most favorable among patients aged <35 years and nulliparous parturients.
Why it matters
Understanding the cost-effectiveness and potential benefits of different cervical ripening methods can guide clinicians in making informed decisions that optimize patient outcomes and resource utilization in obstetric care.