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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Aug;94(2):91-5.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.04.031. Epub 2006 Jul 7.

Sublingual vs. vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor

F E L Feitosa  1 , Z S Sampaio, C A Alencar Jr, M M R Amorim, R Passini Jr
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Sublingual vs. vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor

F E L Feitosa et al. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006 Aug.

Abstract

Objective: To compare sublingual with vaginal misoprostol for the induction of labor.

Methods: This double-blind clinical trial randomized 150 women to receive every 6 h 25 mug of sublingual misoprostol and vaginal placebo or 25 mug of vaginal misoprostol and sublingual placebo. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were analyzed and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated. The significance level was 5%.

Results: Vaginal delivery rates were 57% in the sublingual group and 69% in the vaginal group (RR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6-1.1). There were 11 cases of fetal distress in the sublingual group and 4 cases in the vaginal group (RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 0.9-8.2). There were no significant differences in the number of doses needed, interval between first dose and delivery, incidence of contractility disturbances, or neonatal results.

Conclusion: The administration of misoprostol 25 mug by the sublingual route was neither more effective nor safer than the same dose administered vaginally.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources