Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2002 Jan;186(1):72-6.
doi: 10.1067/mob.2002.118917.

Sublingual misoprostol for the induction of labor at term

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Sublingual misoprostol for the induction of labor at term

Ashalatha Shetty et al. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability of sublingual misoprostol compared with an equivalent dose administered orally for labor induction at term.

Study design: One hundred women with medical or obstetric indications for induction of labor after 37 weeks of gestation and unfavorable cervices were randomized to receive 50 microg of misoprostol either orally or sublingually. The dose was repeated every 4 hours to a maximum of 5 doses if indicated. Previous cesarean delivery was a criteria for exclusion. Our primary outcome measure was the number of patients who went on to have a vaginal delivery within 24 hours of the induction. The need for oxytocin, mode of delivery, number of cesarean deliveries for fetal distress, uterine hyperstimulation rates, and neonatal outcomes were secondary outcome measures. Patient acceptability was assessed by questionnaires completed after delivery.

Results: Significantly more patients were delivered of infants within 24 hours (73.8% versus 45.7%; relative risk, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.4) and the induction to delivery intervals were significantly shorter (20 hours versus 28.3 hours; mean difference, 8.3 hours; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 15.4) in the sublingual group compared with the oral group. There was 1 case of uterine hyperstimulation in the sublingual group. There were no significant differences in the mode of delivery, interventions for fetal distress, or neonatal outcomes in the 2 groups. The satisfaction rates were 82.5% and 85.7% in the oral and sublingual groups respectively, and 9.5% of patients thought that the sublingual tablets did not dissolve completely.

Conclusion: There has been no previous report in the literature of misoprostol given sublingually for labor induction. Sublingual misoprostol seems to have better efficacy than oral misoprostol, seems to be acceptable to patients, and is an option to be considered to induce labor at term.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources