Vaginal Misoprostol Administration for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction

Gaffaney, Cecilia A Lyons

doi:10.1097/00003081-200609000-00021

Cited by 33 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But in that study misoprostol was used in the dose of 25µg every three hourly. Similarly a study by Wing et al, [7] and a systematic review by Crane et al, [4] have shown that misoprostol is more effective than dinoprostone. But since the dose schedules are different and involved higher doses, it is difficult to make direct comparisons.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Is Low Dose Vaginal Misoprostol Better Than Dinoprostone Gel For Induction of Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Madaan

Agrawal

Puri³

et al. 2014

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety profile of low dose vaginal misoprostol with dinoprostone gel for induction of labor in term pregnancies. Methods:The study was conducted at Lady Hardinge Medical College and Smt Sucheta Kriplani Hospital on 100 pregnant women with term pregnancy after application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The women were randomized in 2 groups of 50 women each. Group I received misoprostol 25µg at every six hour vaginally for a maximum of five doses for induction of labor; while group II received dinoprostone gel 0.5 mg every six hourly for a maximum of three doses. Maternal outcomes such as mode of delivery and induction delivery interval; and fetal outcomes such as APGAR score and incidence of NICU admission were assessed in both the groups. Statistical analysis was done using student t-test and chi-square test.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Is Low Dose Vaginal Misoprostol Better Than Dinoprostone Gel For Induction of Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Madaan

Agrawal

Puri³

et al. 2014

JCDR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, excessive uterine contractility resulting in fetal distress is a cause for concern. [9][10][11][12][13][14] Comparing the oral and vaginal administrations of misoprostol, oral administration is easier and has greater acceptability among women. Further, absorption is more rapid and possibly more predictable, with a peak serum concentration following oral administration of 34 minutes and a half-life of 20-40 minutes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of titrated oral misoprostol solution versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour in term obstetric patients for obstetric and neonatal outcomes: a randomized controlled trial

Mahajan¹,

Shitole²

2018

Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: With more than 15% of all gravid women requiring prostaglandins in cervical ripening and labour induction. However, evidence is not clear about the preferred route or dose of the drug. So this study was designed with objectives to compare the induction delivery interval and safety of titrated oral misoprostol solution with vaginal misoprostol for labour induction in term primigravida women.Methods: In this randomised controlled trial out of 576 eligible women, 220 women as per inclusion criteria between 37 and 42 weeks of gestation with an unfavourable cervix (Bishop score <6) with indication for labour induction were randomly assigned (110each) to receive titrated oral solution of 20 mL misoprostol solution (1 mcg/mL) every 1 hour for four doses and then were titrated against individual uterine response or vaginal misoprostol 25 mcg every 4 hours. Vaginal delivery within 12 hours was the primary outcome. The data were analyzed by intention-to-treat.Results: Vaginal delivery occurred within 12 hours in 56 (50.9%) women in the titrated oral group and 24 (21.8%) women in the vaginal group with significant p-value (<0.001). The incidence of caesarean, hyper stimulation, low apgar score was less in the titrated oral group. More women experienced nausea in the titrated oral group.Conclusions:Titrated oral misoprostol is safe and effective for labour induction in primigravida patients with unfavourable cervix.

show abstract

“…Induction of labour with this analogue does not affect the frequency at which caesarean section is required. There is an increase in the rate of uterine hyperstimulation resulting in changes in fetal heart rate (FHR) pattern and staining of the amniotic fluid with meconium but without any apparent deleterious effect on the outcome [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] (for reviews [11][12][13] ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A randomised controlled trial of intravaginal dinoprostone, intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical balloon catheter for labour induction

Prager

Eneroth-Grimfors

Edlund

et al. 2008

BJOG

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of induction of labour by vaginal application of dinoprostone or misoprostol or transcervical insertion of a balloon (Bard) catheter.Design A non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial.Setting A tertiary level Swedish hospital.Population A total of 592 women who had undergone full-term pregnancies, not previously been subjected to a caesarean section, and required induction of labour for common, routine indications.Methods Women were randomly assigned to induction of labour using intravaginal dinoprostone (2 mg once every 6 hours) or misoprostol (25 micrograms once every 4 hours) or a transcervical balloon catheter.Main outcome measures The time interval between induction to delivery in general and vaginal delivery in particular, the mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal parameters of outcome.Results Of the 588 subjects included in the final intentionto-treat analysis, 191 were assigned to treatment with dinoprostone, 199 with misoprostol and 198 with the balloon catheter. The shortest mean induction-to-delivery interval was obtained with the catheter (12.9 hours versus 16.8 and 17.3 hours for dinoprostone and misoprostol, respectively). The efficacies of the two prostaglandins were similar. The maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with each of the three procedures were similar.Conclusions Induction of labour with a transcervical balloon catheter is effective and safe and can be recommended as the first choice. The two prostaglandins, dinoprostone and misoprostol, were shown to be equally effective and safe, while misoprostol costs significantly less and is easier to store.Keywords Balloon catheter, cervical ripening, dinoprostone, induction of labour, misoprostol, prostaglandin.Please cite this paper as: Prager M, Eneroth-Grimfors E, Edlund M, Marions L. A randomised controlled trial of intravaginal dinoprostone, intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical balloon catheter for labour induction.

show abstract

Vaginal Misoprostol Administration for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction

Cited by 33 publications

References 64 publications

Is Low Dose Vaginal Misoprostol Better Than Dinoprostone Gel For Induction of Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Is Low Dose Vaginal Misoprostol Better Than Dinoprostone Gel For Induction of Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of titrated oral misoprostol solution versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour in term obstetric patients for obstetric and neonatal outcomes: a randomized controlled trial

A randomised controlled trial of intravaginal dinoprostone, intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical balloon catheter for labour induction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About