A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices

Abstract

Misoprostol is an effective agent for cervical ripening and labor induction, but it causes an increase in cesarean deliveries associated with uterine hyperstimulation.

Induction of Labour by Intravaginal Misosprostol and Intracervical Dinoprostone: A Comparative Study

“…Buser D et al in their study found greater CS rate in Misoprostol group (35.5% versus 21.5%). [6] Sanches-Ramos L et al, too found higher CS rate in Misoprostol group (22.2% versus 13%). [14] Regarding induction-delivery interval, Sahu L et al and Fernandez E et al found it to be shorter in Misoprostol group.…”

“…[6] Ozan H et al also found that, 50 µg intra-vaginal misoprostol combined with oxytocin augmentation when necessary, was an effective and safe method of labour-induction. [10] The current study findings corroborate with their study finding.…”

“…[5,6] They also showed that the patients were more or less equally distributed among the primigravidae and multi-gravidae. In the present study women from the age-group of 20-25 years constituted only 41%, the majority (42%) being from the age-group of 26-30 years.…”

Comparative evaluation of low dose-vaginal misoprostol and intra-cervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour in term pregnancy

“…12 David Buser et al defined successful induction as the onset of good uterine contractions and a Bishops score >5. 13 By this parameter, too, Misoprostol was associated with more successful inductions. As with previously mentioned authors, Buser et al also reported more vaginal deliveries within 24 hours and a lesser need for oxytocin augmentation with Misoprostol use.…”

A randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol tablet and intracervical dinoprostone gel in labor induction of women with prolonged pregnancies

“…12 However, it is difficult to interpret previously published studies comparing misoprostol with dinoprostone for induction of labour since majority of them have included both complicated and uncomplicated pregnancies as well as a wide gestational age (GA) range (37-42 weeks). [13][14][15] Moreover, to reduce the risk of side effects, one can either decrease the dose of the drug or prolong the dosage interval. In addition, Alexander et al, have recently shown that in prolonged pregnancies it was not the induction per se that would increase the risk for caesarean section (CS), but was the patients-related risk factors such as undilated cervix.…”