Induction of labour in nulliparous women- quick or slow: a cohort study comparing slow-release vaginal insert with low-dose misoprostol oral tablets

被引:14
作者
Eriksson, Axelina [1 ,2 ]
Jeppesen, Sarah [3 ]
Krebs, Lone [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Holbaek Cent Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Holbaek, Denmark
[2] Hvidovre Univ Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Kettegaard 30, DK-2650 Hvidovre, Denmark
[3] Naestved Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Naestved, Denmark
[4] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Clin Med, Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
Induced; Induction; Labour; Misoprostol; Angusta; Misodel; Nulliparous; 3RD STAGE; TERM;
D O I
10.1186/s12884-020-2770-0
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BackgroundThis study was undertaken with the objective of comparing efficacy and safety for two different regimens using misoprostol for induction of labour.MethodsThe study was set in two different hospitals in the region of Zeeland, Denmark, and designed as a prospective cohort study. Nulliparous women with unripe cervix, eligible for vaginal delivery and medical induction of labour were included. Exclusion criteria were a previous uterine scar, suspicion of growth restriction of the fetus and prelabour rupture of membranes.One department used 25 mcg oral misoprostol tablets and the other department used 200 mcg slow-release misoprostol vaginal insert, for induction of labour.Primary outcomes were predefined as frequency of cesarean section, tachysystole and delivery within 24h. Secondary outcomes were: time from induction to delivery, use of additional methods for induction, postpartum hemorrhage, anal sphincter rupture, epidural, pyrexia (rectal temperature> 38.5 degrees C), prolonged rupture of membranes, and use of tocolysis.ResultsNo significant differences in women achieving vaginal delivery was found. However, a significantly increased risk of tachysystole for the vaginal administration route was observed; 28.4% compared with 2.3%. There were no events of serious neonatal asphyxia. Half of the women induced with vaginal insert delivered within 24h, compared with 16.8% of the women induced with oral misoprostol.ConclusionsInduction with vaginal slow-release misoprostol leads to quicker delivery with an increased risk of tachysystole but with similar perinatal outcomes and rates of cesarean sections. Low-dose oral misoprostol appears to be safe, however it leads to an increased use of secondary methods and a tendency of more intrapartum pyrexia.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02693587 on February 262,016.EudraCT number 2020-000366-42 on 23 January 2020, retrospectively registered.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour
    Alfirevic, Z.
    Devane, D.
    Gyte, G. M. L.
    [J]. COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2006, (03):
  • [2] Gattas DSDB, 2012, REV BRAS GINECOL OBS, V34, P164, DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032012000400005
  • [3] The misoprostol vaginal insert compared with oral misoprostol for labor induction in term pregnancies: a pair-matched case-control study
    Doebert, Moritz
    Brandstetter, Aleke
    Henrich, Wolfgang
    Rawnaq, Tamina
    Hasselbeck, Hendrik
    Doebert, Timm Fabian
    Hinkson, Larry
    Schwaerzler, Peter
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE, 2018, 46 (03) : 309 - 316
  • [4] WHO multicentre randomised trial of misoprostol in the management of the third stage of labour
    Gülmezoglu, AM
    Villar, J
    Ngoc, NTN
    Piaggio, G
    Carroli, G
    Adetoro, L
    Abdel-Aleem, H
    Cheng, LN
    Hofmeyr, GJ
    Lumbiganon, P
    Unger, C
    Prendiville, W
    Pinol, A
    Elbourne, D
    El-Refaey, H
    Schulz, KF
    [J]. LANCET, 2001, 358 (9283) : 689 - 695
  • [5] Hofmeyr GJ, 2009, B WORLD HEALTH ORGAN, V87, P666, DOI [10.2471/BLT.08.055715, 10.2471/BLT.08.062562]
  • [6] Misoprostol dose-related shivering and pyrexia in the third stage of labour
    Lumbiganon, P
    Hofmeyer, J
    Gülmezoglu, AM
    Pinol, A
    Villar, J
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1999, 106 (04): : 304 - 308
  • [7] Pharmacokinetic profiles of controlled-release hydrogel polymer vaginal inserts containing misoprostol
    Powers, Barbara L.
    Wing, Deborah A.
    Carr, Denis
    Ewert, Karine
    Di Spirito, Mike
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2008, 48 (01) : 26 - 34
  • [8] Efficacy and safety of misoprostol vaginal insert vs. oral misoprostol for induction of labor
    Redling, Katharina
    Schaedelin, Sabine
    Huhn, Evelyn Annegret
    Hoesli, Irene
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE, 2019, 47 (02) : 176 - 182
  • [9] Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study
    Schmidt, Markus
    Neophytou, Maria
    Hars, Olaf
    Freudenberg, Julia
    Kuehnert, Maritta
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2019, 299 (01) : 105 - 112
  • [10] Misoprostol vaginal insert (Mysodelle) versus Dinoprostone intravaginal gel (Prostin) for induction of labour
    Sharp, A.
    Faluyi, D.
    Alfirevic, Z.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2019, 240 : 41 - 44