<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0300-9041</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Ginecología y obstetricia de México]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Ginecol. obstet. Méx.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0300-9041</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Federación Mexicana de Colegios de Obstetricia y Ginecología A.C.]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0300-90412019000300006</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24245/gom.v87i3.2541</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Sonda Foley: una alternativa efectiva para la inducción del trabajo de parto]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Foley catheter: An effective alternative for induction of labor]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Espinoza-Herrera]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Daniel Aarón]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hernández-Delgado]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Carlos Antonio]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Valle-Leal]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Jaime Guadalupe]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="Af1">
<institution><![CDATA[,Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social Hospital General Regional 1 Ginecología y Obstetricia]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ciudad Obregón Sonora]]></addr-line>
<country>Mexico</country>
</aff>
<aff id="Af2">
<institution><![CDATA[,Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social Hospital General Regional 1 Departamento de Educación e Investigación en Salud]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ciudad Obregón Sonora]]></addr-line>
<country>Mexico</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2019</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2019</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>87</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<fpage>190</fpage>
<lpage>195</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0300-90412019000300006&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0300-90412019000300006&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0300-90412019000300006&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[Resumen  OBJETIVO: Determinar la efectividad de la inducción del trabajo de parto con sonda Foley en pacientes con embarazo a término, con cesárea previa.  MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS:  ensayo clínico, no controlado, efectuado en pacientes con embarazo de término que acudieron al servicio de Tococirugía de un hospital de segundo nivel de atención de Sonora, México, entre enero y agosto de 2017. Para el procedimiento de inducción se colocó una sonda Foley intracervical, insuflándose el globo con 30-40 cc de solución y ejerciendo tracción constante y lenta. Se estimó el tiempo de inicio de la inducción y se mantuvo en vigilancia constante a la madre y al feto. Se revaloró la escala de Bishop a las 6 h, considerándose efectiva la inducción con la obtención del puntaje &#8805; 6. También se valoró la vía de finalización del embarazo.  RESULTADOS: Se estudiaron 36 pacientes; en 34 de 36 pacientes la sonda Foley fue efectiva. En cuanto a paridad, 13 de 26 eran primigestas. La inducción con sonda Foley fue exitosa en 34 de 36 pacientes, con vía de finalización del embarazo mediante parto en 24 de 36 y cesárea en 12 de 36 mujeres. Del total de participantes, 10 de 36 tenían cesárea previa, culminando 6 de 10 por parto y 4 de 10 por cesárea.  CONCLUSIONES: La inducción de trabajo de parto con sonda Foley es efectiva y representa una buena alternativa en pacientes con antecedente de cesárea previa.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Abstract  OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of induction of labor with Foley catheter in patients with full term pregnancy.  MATERIAL AND METHODS:  uncontrolled clinical trial in patients carried out in patients with term pregnancy who attended the Toco-surgery service of a second-level care hospital in Sonora, Mexico, between January and August 2017. To procedure: insufflating the balloon with 30-40cc of solution and exerting constant and gentle traction. The induction start time was taken and constant monitoring of the binomial was maintained. Bishop&amp;apos;s scale was re-evaluated at 6 o&amp;apos;clock, with induction considered effective, obtaining a score on the modified Bishop&amp;apos;s scale &#8805;6. The route of termination of pregnancy was also valued.  RESULTS:  36 patients were studied; The efficacy of induction with Foley catheter was reported in 34 of 36 patients (94%). For parity, 13/26 women were primigravite. Induction with Foley catheter was successful in 34 of 36 patients, with a route of termination of pregnancy through delivery in 24/36 and cesarean section in 12/36 women. Of the total number of participants, 10 of 36 had a previous caesarean section, culminating 6/10 per delivery and 4/10 by caesarean section.  CONCLUSIONS: The induction of labor with Foley catheter is effective and is a good alternative when there is a history of a previous caesarean section.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Inducción del trabajo de parto]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[embarazo]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[sonda Foley]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Induction of labor]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Pregnancy]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Foley catheter]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<label>1</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[González-Boubeta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Maduración cervical: aceleración de un proceso natural]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Matronas]]></source>
<year>2007</year>
<volume>8</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>24-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<label>2</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jozwiak]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term (PROBAAT trial): an open-label, randomised controlled trial]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Lancet]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>378</volume>
<numero>9809</numero>
<issue>9809</issue>
<page-range>2095-103</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<label>3</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cromi]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Am J Obstet Gynecol]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>207</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>125-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<label>4</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<collab>American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ACOG</collab>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Practice bulletin no. 107: Induction of labor]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Obstet Gynecol]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>114</volume>
<page-range>386-97</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<label>5</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<collab>American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ACOG</collab>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Practice bulletin no. 115: vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Obstet Gynecol]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>116</volume>
<numero>2-1</numero>
<issue>2-1</issue>
<page-range>40-63</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<label>6</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Henry]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Outpatient Foley catheter versus inpatient prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour: a randomised trial]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[BMC Pregnancy Childbirth]]></source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>13</volume>
<numero>25</numero>
<issue>25</issue>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<label>7</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sananes N]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Efficacy and safety of labour induction in patients with a single previous Caesarean section: a proposal for a clinical protocol]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Arch Gynecol Obstet]]></source>
<year>2014</year>
<volume>290</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>669-76</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<label>8</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sciscione]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Methods of cervical ripening and labor induction: mechanical]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Clin Obstet Gynecol]]></source>
<year>2014</year>
<volume>57</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>369-76</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<label>9</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Anabusi]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Mechanical labor induction in the obese population: a secondary analysis of a prospective randomized trial]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Arch Gynecol Obstet]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<volume>293</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>75-80</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<label>10</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Vaknin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Z]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Foley catheter balloon vs locally applied prostaglandins for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review and metaanalysis]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Am J Obstet Gynecol]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>203</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>418-29</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<label>11</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kehl]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Combination of misoprostol and mechanical dilation for induction of labour: a randomized controlled trial]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>159</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>315-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
