+ 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

Uterine hyperstimulation following cervix ripening with dinoprostone in a vaginal insert system



Uterine hyperstimulation following cervix ripening with dinoprostone in a vaginal insert system



Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde 148(26): 1300-1303



Three women, aged 28, 29 and 31 years, primigravidae, with an unripe cervix and an indication for induction of labour, were administered dinoprostone in a controlled vaginal insert system (VIS). A few hours after the insertion of the VIS strong, prolonged contractions occurred with bradycardia in the foetus, resulting in an emergency caesarean section. The children and the mothers recovered well. A potential adverse drug reaction of prostaglandins is uterine hyperstimulation. The sustained-release intravaginal dinoprostone was expected to be safer than the intravaginal or intracervical application of a prostaglandin gel. But data from the literature are conflicting. The risk of uterine hyperstimulation by prostaglandins including the sustained-release dinoprostone system necessitates a re-evaluation of the indications for induction of labour and the procedures of cervical priming. Up-to-date guidelines are an essential tool for the safe use of prostaglandins in daily obstetric practice.

(PDF emailed within 1 workday: $29.90)

Accession: 050919829

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 15279216


Related references

Effect of vaginal pH on efficacy of the controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening/labor induction. Journal of Maternal-Fetal & 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

Dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening and labor induction: A meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology 98(3): 519-520, September, 2001

Comparative efficacy of vaginal insert and dinoprostone gel for cervical ripening at term in current practice. Journal de Gynecologie, Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 34(1 Pt 1): 62-68, 2005

A comparison of misoprostol, controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert and oxytocin for cervical ripening. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 284(6): 1331-1337, 2012

Membrane stripping vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in the management of pregnancies beyond 41 weeks with an unfavorable cervix. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 178(1 PART 2): S30, 1998

Double-balloon catheter vs. dinoprostone vaginal insert for induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 291(6): 1221-1227, 2015

Cervical ripening and labor induction with a controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert: A meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology 94(5 PART 2): 878-883, 1999

Membrane sweeping versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in the management of pregnancies beyond 41 weeks with an unfavorable cervix. Journal of Perinatology 19(2): 88-91, 2000

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

Dinoprostone: slow release vaginal insert (Propess) and intracervical gel (Prepidil) for the induction of labour with unriped cervix. Minerva Ginecologica 56(5): 413-418, 2004

Reduction in resource use with the misoprostol vaginal insert vs the dinoprostone vaginal insert for labour induction: a model-based analysis from a United Kingdom healthcare perspective. Bmc Health Services Research 16(): 49-49, 2016