A Comparative Study between Sublingual Misoprostol (PGE₁) versus Intracervical Dinoprostone Gel (PGE₂) in the Induction of Labor:- A Prospective Observational Study

Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Sublingual Versus Oral Misoprostol for the Induction of Labor: A Randomized Open-Label Study

“…This difference was statistically significant. Deepika et al [ 14 ] compared sublingual misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone gel and reported that there was a significant reduction in the requirement of augmentation by artificial rupture of membranes (ARM) in the group receiving sublingual misoprostol. Only 17% of women required oxytocin in the sublingual group in their study.…”

“…Shetty et al reported that 46.3% of women delivered within 24 hours. Deepika et al [ 14 ] reported a vaginal delivery rate was 66% with sublingual misoprostol. Dorr et al [ 19 ] did a retrospective analysis of 207 women receiving either vaginal or buccal misoprostol.…”

“…Ayati et al [ 18 ] reported an induction to delivery interval of 11.62±6.76 hours with 25mcg sublingual misoprostol. Deepika et al [ 14 ] reported that the misoprostol group showed shorter induction to delivery interval, a greater number of vaginal deliveries, and a reduced need of cesarean sections compared to the dinoprostone group. In their study, the induction to delivery interval was 14.1 hours with oral misoprostol.…”

“…Malik et al [ 13 ] also found no significant difference in fetal outcomes in their study of oral and sublingual misoprostol. However, Deepika et al [ 14 ] reported a NICU admission rate of 20%. In our study, the neonatal outcomes were comparable in both groups, with NICU admission of only 10% in the oral group and 6.3% in the sublingual group (p=0.24).…”