+ 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 randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction



A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction



American Journal of Perinatology 26(1): 33-38



We compared labor induced by vaginal misoprostol versus a supracervical Foley catheter and oral misoprostol. Singleton pregnancies at > or = 24 weeks' gestation were randomized to either an initial 25-microg dose of intravaginal misoprostol, followed by 50-microg intravaginal doses at 3- to 6-hour intervals, or a supracervical Foley balloon and 100 microg of oral misoprostol at 4- to 6-hour intervals. Primary outcome was time from induction to delivery. One hundred twenty-six women were randomized to vaginal misoprostol alone (group I) and 106 women to Foley and oral misoprostol (group II). The groups were similar in age, weight, gestational age, parity, indication for induction of labor, and oxytocin use. Cesarean delivery rates at 37% and cesarean indications were similar ( P = 0.25). The time from induction to delivery in group II (12.9 hours) was significantly shorter than that in group I (17.8 hours, P < 0.001). Uterine tachysystole occurred less often in the vaginal misoprostol group (21% versus 39%, P = 0.015). Compared with vaginal misoprostol, delivery within 24 hours was significantly more likely with a Foley balloon and oral misoprostol. The use of terbutaline and peripartum outcomes were similar in the two groups.

Accession: 051227747

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 18850516

DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1091396


Related references

Cervical Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor: a randomized clinical trial. Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia E Obstetricia 32(7): 346-351, 2011

Effect of extra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol alone on cervical ripening and induction of labor in Kenya, a randomized controlled trial. Bmc Pregnancy and Childbirth 18(1): 300, 2018

Combination of foley bulb and vaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal misoprostol alone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology 122(1): 156, 2013

Three doses of oral misoprostol versus an intra-cervical Foley catheter for 24 hours for pre-induction cervical ripening in post- dated pregnancies: a randomized controlled trial. Ceylon Medical Journal 62(2): 77-82, 2017

Prospective randomized clinical trial of inpatient cervical ripening with stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 192(3): 747-752, 2005

Oral misoprostol vs. vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics: the Official Organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 89(2): 142-143, 2005

Cervical ripening and induction of labor with misoprostol, dinoprostone gel, and a Foley catheter: A randomized trial of 3 techniques. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 186(6): 1124-1129, 2002

Comparison between vaginal and sublingual misoprostol 50 µg for cervical ripening prior to induction of labor: randomized clinical trial. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 295(4): 839-844, 2017

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

Vaginal misoprostol is more effective with fewer side effects than oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 185(6 Supplement): S204, 2001

A randomized controlled trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter plus oxytocin for labor induction. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 89(8): 1045-1052, 2010

Oral misoprostol alone versus oral misoprostol and Foley's catheter for induction of labor: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 43(8): 1270-1277, 2017

A prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing misoprostol, Foley catheter, and combination misoprostol-Foley for labor induction. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 187(6 Supplement): S57, 2002

Efficacy and safety of administering oral misoprostol by titration compared to vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial. Bmc Pregnancy and Childbirth 19(1): 14-14, 2019

A comparison of vaginal versus buccal misoprostol for cervical ripening in women for labor induction at term (the IMPROVE trial): a triple masked randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2019, 2019