+ 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

Vaginally administered misoprostol versus the dinoprostone vaginal insert for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction



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




(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 034174436

Download citation: RISBibTeXText


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

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

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

Six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 29(3): 147-151, 2003

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 comparison of orally administered misoprostol with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 180(5): 1155-1160, 1999

Labor induction for premature rupture of membranes using vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert. American Journal of Perinatology 31(3): 181-186, 2014

Randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert for labor induction. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 13(4): 254-259, 2003

Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert For Cervical Ripening And Labor Induction. Obstetrics & Gynecology 97(5): 847-855, 2001

Low-dose vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone insert for induction of labor beyond 41st week: A randomized trial. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2019, 2019

Comparative efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in labor induction at term: a randomized trial. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 280(1): 19-24, 2008

Effect of vaginal pH on efficacy of the controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening/labor induction. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 13(4): 250-253, 2003

Cervical ripening and labor induction with a controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert. Obstetrics and Gynecology 95(4): 637-638, 2000