Oral or Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction and Cesarean Delivery Risk

被引:12
|
作者
Handal-Orefice, Roxane C. [1 ]
Friedman, Alexander M.
Chouinard, Sujata M.
Eke, Ahizechukwu C.
Feinberg, Bruce
Politch, Joseph
Iverson, Ronald E.
Yarrington, Christina D.
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Coll Phys & Surg, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, New York, NY 10027 USA
来源
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY | 2019年 / 134卷 / 01期
关键词
D O I
10.1097/AOG.0000000000003274
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether cervical ripening with oral misoprostol increases cesarean delivery risk and prolongs time to vaginal delivery compared with vaginal misoprostol in a predominantly overweight population. METHODS: This single center, retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary care academic medical center and compared labor induction outcomes with vaginal misoprostol to outcomes with oral misoprostol after a complete institutional shift to oral misoprostol. Labor induction using 25 micrograms vaginal misoprostol in 20132014 was compared with 50 micrograms oral misoprostol in 2014-2015. The primary outcome was cesarean delivery. Secondary outcomes included time to vaginal delivery, uterine tachysystole, maternal hemorrhage, and composite adverse neonatal outcomes. Demographics and outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical tests. Multivariable regression models accounting for potential confounders were created for the primary and secondary outcomes with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) as the measures of effect. RESULTS: There were 138 women in the oral and 138 women in the vaginal misoprostol groups. In the overall cohort, the median (interquartile range) body mass index was 31.7 (28.2-36.8) and most women (72%) were of either black or Hispanic race or ethnicity. The frequency of cesarean delivery was higher in the oral than the vaginal misoprostol group (32% vs 21%; P=.04). The adjusted odds of cesarean was higher with oral misoprostol (aOR 2.01; 95% CI 1.07-3.76). Among nulliparous women, the frequency of cesarean delivery was 41% in the oral and 28% in the vaginal misoprostol groups (aOR 2.79; 95% CI 1.26-6.19). Women had a longer time to vaginal delivery in the oral compared with vaginal misoprostol group (41 vs 31 hours respectively, P=.01). Tachysystole occurred more frequently with vaginal misoprostol (20% vs 11%; P=.04). CONCLUSION: Compared with vaginal misoprostol, oral misoprostol may be associated with increased risk of cesarean delivery and longer time to vaginal delivery.
引用
收藏
页码:10 / 16
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor
    de Lucena Feitosa, Francisco Edson
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE GINECOLOGIA E OBSTETRICIA, 2006, 28 (09): : 566 - 566
  • [42] The effect of vaginal pH on the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor
    Gunalp, S
    Bildirici, I
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2000, 79 (04) : 283 - 285
  • [43] Induction of Labor and Cesarean Delivery
    Grobman, William A.
    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2016, 374 (09): : 880 - 881
  • [44] Oral misoprostol administration for labor induction
    Weeks, Andrew
    Alfirevic, Zarko
    CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 49 (03): : 658 - 671
  • [45] Misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a delivery system with accurate dosing and rapid discontinuation
    Stephenson, Megan L.
    Hawkins, J. Seth
    Powers, Barbara L.
    Wing, Deborah A.
    WOMENS HEALTH, 2014, 10 (01) : 29 - 36
  • [46] Vaginal misoprostol is more effective with fewer side effects than oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor
    Bonebrake, R
    Haag, T
    Fleming, A
    Temp, M
    Haynatzki, G
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2001, 185 (06) : S204 - S204
  • [48] Oral or vaginal misoprostol administration for induction of labor: A randomized, double-blind trial
    Adair, CD
    Weeks, JW
    Barrilleaux, S
    Edwards, M
    Burlison, K
    Lewis, DF
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1998, 92 (05): : 810 - 813
  • [50] 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