A randomized controlled trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone gel for labor induction

被引：0
作者：
Girija S. [1 ]
Manjunath A.P. [1 ,2 ]
机构：
[1] Dept of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Manipal University, Dr TMA Pai Rotary Hospital Karkala, Manipal, Karnataka State
[2] Dept of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kasturba Medical College
来源：
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India | 2011年 / 61卷 / 2期
关键词：
dinoprostone; induction of labor; low dose; misoprostol;
D O I：
10.1007/s13224-011-0031-x
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Objectives: To compare the safety and efficacy of low dose misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction Methods: It was an open label randomized controlled trial conducted at department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Dr TMA Pai Rotary Hospital, Karkala. The main outcome measure was induction-to-vaginal delivery interval. Secondary outcome measures were the labor characteristics, maternal complications and neonatal outcomes. Results: Out of 320 eligible women included for final analysis, 159 received misoprostol and 161 dinoprostone. There was no significant difference between the two groups in induction-to-vaginal delivery interval, mode of delivery, number of women delivering within 24 hours and neonatal outcomes. The efficacies of the two prostaglandins were similar. Conclusion: Low dose misoprostol is as efficient as dinoprostone in achieving active labor and delivering with in 24 hours. The maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with each group were similar. It is a cheaper alternative for labor induction. © 2011 Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI).
引用
收藏
页码：153 / 160
页数：7
相关论文
共 12 条
  • [1] Hofmeyr G.J., Gulmezoglu A.M., Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour, The Cochrane Database Syst Rev, (2003)
  • [2] Sanchez-Ramos L., Kaunitz A.M., Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: A systematic review of the literature, Clin Obstet Gynecol, 43, pp. 475-488, (2000)
  • [3] New U.S. Food and Drug Administration Labeling on Cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy, International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 82, 1, pp. 137-138, (2003)
  • [4] (2008)
  • [5] Sanchez-Ramos L., Kaunitz A.M., Delke I., Labor induction with 25 μg versus 50 μg intravaginal misoprostol: A systematic review, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 99, 1, pp. 145-151, (2002)
  • [6] Prager M., Eneroth-Grimfors E., Edlund M., Et al., A randomised controlled trial of intravaginal dinoprostone, intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical balloon catheter for labour induction, BJOG, 115, pp. 1443-1450, (2008)
  • [7] Gregson S., Waterstone M., Norman I., Murrells T., A randomised controlled trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal gel for inducing labour at term, BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 112, 4, pp. 438-444, (2005)
  • [8] Van Gemund N., Scherjon S., Le Cessie S., Schagen Van Leeuwen J.H., Van Roosmalen J., Kanhai H.H.H., A randomised trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for labour induction, BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 111, 1, pp. 42-49, (2004)
  • [9] Nanda S., Singhal S.R., Papneja A., Induction of labour with intravaginal misoprostol and prostaglandin E <sub>2</sub> gel: A comparative study, Tropical Doctor, 37, 1, pp. 21-24, (2007)
  • [10] A Guid for Midwives and Doctors, (2007)
12