+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E-2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction



A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E-2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction



American Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 172(6): 1804-1810



OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical prostaglandin E-2 (dinoprostone) gel for preinduction cervical ripening and induction of labor. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred thirty-five patients with indications for induction of labor and unfavorable cervices were randomly assigned to receive either intravaginal misoprostol or intracervical dinoprostone. Fifty microgram tablets of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every 3 hours for a maximum of six doses. Prostaglandin E-2 in gel form, 0.5 mg, was placed into the endocervix every 6 hours for a maximum of three doses. Medication was not given after either spontaneous rupture of membranes or beginning of active labor. RESULTS: Among 135 patients enrolled, 68 received misoprostol and 67 received dinoprostone. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was shorter in the misoprostol group (903.3 +- 482.1 minutes) than in the dinoprostone group (1410.9 +- 869.1 minutes) (p lt 0.001). Oxytocin augmentation of labor occurred more often in the dinoprostone group (65.7%) than in the misoprostol group (33.8%) (p lt 0.001). There were no significant differences between routes of delivery. Ten of the misoprostol-treated patients (14.7%) and 13 of the dinoprostone-treated patients (19.4%) had cesarean deliveries. There was a higher prevalence of tachysystole (six or more uterine contractions in a 10-minute window for two consecutive 10-minute periods) in the misoprostol group (36.7%) than in the dinoprostone group (11.9%) (p lt 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in frequency of uterine hyperstimulation or hypertonus. There was a higher prevalence of meconium passage in the misoprostol group (27.9%) than in the dinoprostone group (10.5%) (p lt 0.05). There was no significant difference in frequency of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings, 1- or 5-minute Apgar scores lt 7, neonatal resuscitations, or admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginally administered misoprostol is an effective agent for cervical ripening and induction of labor: however when given at this dosage, it is associated with a higher prevalence of tachysystole and meconium passage than is dinoprostone. Further studies to compare the safety of misoprostol to that of dinoprostone and to delineate an optimal dosing regimen for misoprostol are needed.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 008031556

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 7778636

DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)91415-3


Related references

Comparison of 25 and 50 g Vaginally Administered Misoprostol for Preinduction of Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation 53(1): 16-21, 2002

Comparison of 25 and 50 mug vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction of cervical ripening and labor induction. Gynecologic & Obstetric Investigation 53(1): 16-21, 2002

Randomized comparison of misoprostol and dinoprostone for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 96(5): 366-369, 1997

Comparison of 25 and 50 microg vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction of cervical ripening and labor induction. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation 53(1): 16-21, 2002

A comparison of differing dosing regimens of vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. American Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 175(1): 158-164, 1996

Open randomized comparison of prostaglandin E2 given by intracervical gel or vagitory for preinduction cervical ripening and induction of labor. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 70(7-8): 549-553, 1991

Open Randomized Comparison of Prostaglandin E2 Given by Intracervical Gel or Vagitory for Preinduction Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labor. Obstetric and Gynecologic Survey 47(8): 537-538, 1992

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) with those of dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2) for cervical ripening and induction of labor in a community hospital. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 180(6 PART 1): 1551-1559, 1999

Vaginally administered misoprostol versus the dinoprostone vaginal insert for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 176(1 PART 2): S113, 1997

A randomized clinical trial comparing misoprostol with prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening. American Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 177(5): 1067-1070,., 1997

Oral misoprostol vs. intravaginal prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening. A randomized trial. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 46(7): 641-646, 2001

Evaluation of glyceryl trinitrate, misoprostol, and prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening in term pregnancy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 31(3): 210-215, 2005

Trial of labor after cesarean delivery A pilot study of oral misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening. Obstetrics & Gynecology 97(4 Supplement): 68S, 2001

Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of misoprostol and prostaglandin E(2) in the preinduction and induction of labor. Medical Science Monitor 7(5): 1023-1028, 2001

Comparison between vaginal misoprostol and cervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Tennessee Medicine 94(1): 25-27, 2001