Induction of labor in twin pregnancies with oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone - is it effective and safe?

被引:7
作者
Huber, Georgine [1 ]
Schuetz, Heike [1 ]
Seelbach-Goebel, Birgit [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Regensburg, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, St Hedwig Hosp, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany
关键词
Dinoprostone; labor induction; misoprostol; time of delivery; twin gestation; INDICATED LATE-PRETERM; TERM; SINGLETON; EFFICACY; DELIVERY; WOMEN; RISK;
D O I
10.3109/14767058.2014.942629
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for the induction of labor in twin pregnancies. Methods: All twin pregnancies >= 34 weeks 0 days that were induced with either misoprostol or dinoprostone in St. Hedwig Hospital between 2002 and 2013 were included in this retrospective study. Length of induction, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: After identifying 186 twin mothers matching the inclusion criteria, 154 women were induced with misoprostol (group A) and 32 with dinoprostone (group B). There were no differences in demographic data between the groups. Rates of successful vaginal delivery (53.9% versus 56.3%) and length of induction to delivery (30.2 h versus 26.9 h) were also similar. There were slightly higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in group B (16.6% versus 10.8%), but without reaching statistical significance. Neonatal outcomes regarding umbilical artery pH <7.20 and one minute Apgar also were without significant differences. Conclusions: Study data indicate that oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone are similarly effective and safe for the induction of labor in twin gestations. Further trials with larger series are needed to confirm these results.
引用
收藏
页码:1043 / 1046
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Analysis of intravaginal misoprostol 0.2 mg versus intracervical dinoprostone 0.5 mg doses for labor induction at term pregnancies
    Gornisiewicz, Teresa
    Jaworowski, Andrzej
    Zembala-Szczerba, Malgorzata
    Babczyk, Dorota
    Huras, Hubert
    GINEKOLOGIA POLSKA, 2017, 88 (06) : 320 - 324
  • [42] A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction
    Wing, DA
    OrtizOmphroy, G
    Paul, RH
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 177 (03) : 612 - 618
  • [43] Vaginal dinoprostone and misoprostol are equally safe in labour induction at term whereas dinoprostone is less efficacious for cervical ripening and shortening the time of labour
    Zietek, Maciej
    Swiatkowska-Freud, Malgorzata
    Grajnert, Kinga
    Celewicz, Zbigniew
    Szczuko, Malgorzata
    GINEKOLOGIA POLSKA, 2021, 92 (06) : 428 - 435
  • [44] Vaginal assessment and expedited amniotomy in oral misoprostol labor induction in nulliparas: a randomized trial
    Win, Sandar Tin
    Tan, Peng Chiong
    Balchin, Imelda
    Khong, Su Yen
    Lay, Khaing Si
    Omar, Siti Zawiah
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2019, 220 (04) : 387.e1 - 387.e12
  • [45] A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor
    Uludag, S
    Saricali, FS
    Madazli, R
    Cepni, I
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2005, 122 (01) : 57 - 60
  • [46] A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Vaginal Misoprostol versus Cervical Foley Plus Oral Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction
    Hill, James B.
    Thigpen, Brad D.
    Bofill, James A.
    Magann, Everett
    Moore, Lisa E.
    Martin, James N., Jr.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2009, 26 (01) : 33 - 38
  • [47] Low-dose vaginal misoprostol vs vaginal dinoprostone insert for induction of labor beyond 41st week: A randomized trial
    De Bonrostro Torralba, Carlos
    Tejero Cabrejas, Eva Lucia
    Envid Lazaro, Blanca Mar
    Franco Royo, Maria Jesus
    Roca Arquillue, Montserrat
    Campillos Maza, Jose Manuel
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2019, 98 (07) : 913 - 919
  • [48] Dinoprostone versus misoprostol: a randomized study of nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor
    Lokugamage, AU
    Forsyth, SF
    Sullivan, KR
    El Refaey, H
    Rodeck, CH
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2003, 82 (02) : 133 - 137
  • [49] The efficacy and safety of oral and vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone on women experiencing labor: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis of 53 randomized controlled trials
    Ramadan, Mohamed
    Bashour, George
    Eldokmery, Engy
    Alkhawajah, Amnah
    Alsalhi, Karim
    Badr, Yara
    Emad, Asmaa
    Labieb, Fatma
    MEDICINE, 2024, 103 (40) : e39861
  • [50] Lower dose vaginal and oral misoprostol in labor induction - RCT
    Young, D
    Delaney, T
    Armson, T
    Fanning, C
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2001, 185 (06) : S203 - S203