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

Comparing two dinoprostone agents for preinduction cervical ripening at term. A randomized trial



Comparing two dinoprostone agents for preinduction cervical ripening at term. A randomized trial



Journal of Reproductive Medicine 44(8): 724-728



OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety, efficacy and cost of two methods of administering commercially available dinoprostone for preinduction cervical ripening at term. STUDY DESIGN: Sixty-nine women admitted for labor induction were randomized to receive one of two commercially available agents for cervical ripening. Half the patients received a gel containing 0.5 mg of dinoprostone placed intracervically every four hours. The other half received a polymer insert containing 10 mg of dinoprostone intravaginally. After 12 hours of cervical ripening, oxytocin was given and amniotomy performed to induce labor. RESULTS: Among 69 women randomized, 35 received the gel and 34 the polymer. No significant differences were noted between the two groups in starting characteristics or indication for induction. Both groups were similar with respect to change in Bishop score, start-to-delivery interval, amount of oxytocin required, mode of delivery and success of induction. A slightly higher rate of hyperstimulation was noted in the polymer group, although this did not lead to fetal or maternal morbidity. The average costs per patient for the two agents were similar. CONCLUSION: The two dinoprostone agents are similar with respect to efficacy. The polymer group had slightly more complications but without adverse fetal or maternal outcomes. A larger, multicenter trial would be required to determine actual differences in the efficacy, safety and cost of these two agents.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 010355283

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 10483544


Related references

Comparing two dinoprostone agents for cervical ripening and induction of labor: a randomized trial. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 138(2): 135-140, 2007

Outpatient misoprostol compared with dinoprostone gel for preinduction cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 105(3): 466-472, 2005

A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 207(2): 125.E1-7, 2012

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

A randomized trial comparing a 30-mL and an 80-mL Foley catheter balloon for preinduction cervical ripening. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 191(5): 1632-1636, 2004

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

A randomized controlled study comparing Prostaglandin E2 vaginal suppository with intra-cervical Foleys catheter balloon for preinduction cervical ripening at term. West African Journal of Medicine 34(2): 77-82, 2015

Elective cervical ripening in women beyond the 290th day of pregnancy: a randomized trial comparing 2 dinoprostone preparations. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 52(10): 945-949, 2007

A randomized clinical trial comparing misoprostol suppositories with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 184(1): S118, January, 2001

Preinduction cervical ripening with the Foley catheter and saline infusion vs. cervical dinoprostone. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics: the Official Organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 83(2): 211-213, 2003

Randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: misoprostol vs oxytocin. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 199(3): 305.E1-5, 2008

Mifepristone for preinduction cervical ripening beyond 41 weeks' gestation: A randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology 96(4): 543-548, October, 2000

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

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

Evaluation of Isosorbide Mononitrate for Preinduction of Cervical Ripening: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial. Journal of Family & Reproductive Health 9(2): 75-81, 2015