A critical appraisal of the misoprostol removable, controlled-release vaginal delivery system of labor induction
- PMID: 26648758
- PMCID: PMC4648618
- DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S62372
A critical appraisal of the misoprostol removable, controlled-release vaginal delivery system of labor induction
Abstract
Background: Induction of labor is a major issue in pregnancy management. Finding strategies to increase rate and decrease time to vaginal delivery is an important goal, but maternal or neonatal safety must remain the primary objective. Misoprostol is a synthetic analogue of prostaglandin used off label to ripen the cervix and induce labor. The misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI) was designed to allow a controlled-release delivery of misoprostol (from 50 to 200 μg) with a removal tape. The objective of this review was to make a critical appraisal of this device referring to the literature.
Methods: A literature search was performed in the PubMed and Cochrane databases using the keywords "vaginal misoprostol insert".
Results: Several studies compared different doses of MVI (50, 100, 150, and 200 μg) with the 10 mg dinoprostone insert. The 100 μg MVI compared with the dinoprostone vaginal insert (DVI) showed similar efficacy and no significant differences in cesarean delivery rate. MVI 200 μg compared with DVI showed a reduced time to vaginal delivery and oxytocin need but had an increased risk of uterine hyperstimulation. The rate of hyperstimulation syndrome was two to three times more frequent with the 200 μg MVI than the 100 μg.
Conclusion: Current data suggest that the 100 μg MVI would provide the best balance between efficacy and safety. Further studies should be performed to evaluate this dose, especially in high-risk situations needing induction of labor.
Keywords: efficacy; pregnancy; prostaglandins; safety.
Similar articles
-
Misoprostol vaginal insert versus dinoprostone vaginal insert: A comparison of labour and delivery outcomes.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019 Apr;235:93-96. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.07.025. Epub 2018 Jul 25. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019. PMID: 30122321
-
Do we need a 200 μg misoprostol vaginal insert? A retrospective cohort study comparing the misoprostol vaginal insert to oral misoprostol.J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020 Jun;46(6):851-857. doi: 10.1111/jog.14230. Epub 2020 May 3. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020. PMID: 32363787
-
Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 May 10;18(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s12884-018-1788-z. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018. PMID: 29747591 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy and safety of misoprostol compared with the dinoprostone for labor induction at term: a meta-analysis.J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(8):1297-307. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1046828. Epub 2015 Jun 11. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016. PMID: 26067262 Review.
-
Oral, vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labor.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005 Oct;91(1):2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.07.002. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005. PMID: 16109419 Review.
Cited by
-
Labor induction with randomized comparison of cervical, oral and intravaginal misoprostol.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Oct 27;21(1):721. doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-04196-4. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021. PMID: 34706675 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Is Misoprostol Vaginal Insert Safe for the Induction of Labor in High-Risk Pregnancy Obese Women?Healthcare (Basel). 2021 Apr 14;9(4):464. doi: 10.3390/healthcare9040464. Healthcare (Basel). 2021. PMID: 33919898 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy and safety of misoprostol versus oxytocin for labor induction in women with prelabor rupture of membranes: a meta-analysis.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025 Apr 21;25(1):461. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-07592-2. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025. PMID: 40259229 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Organization WH . WHO Recommendations for Induction of Labour. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. [Accessed May 30, 2015]. Available from: http://apps.who.int//iris/handle/10665/44531.
-
- Products – Data Briefs – Number 155. 2014. [Accessed May 30, 2015]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db155.htm.
-
- Blondel B, Lelong N, Kermarrec M, Goffinet F, Coordination nationale des Enquêtes Nationales Périnatales La santé périnatale en France métropolitaine de 1995 à 2010: résultats des enquêtes nationales périnatales [Trends in perinatal health in France between 1995 and 2010: results from the National Perinatal Surveys] J Gynécologie Obstétrique Biol Reprod. 2012;41(2):151–166. French. - PubMed
-
- Baacke KA, Edwards RK. Preinduction cervical assessment. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49(3):564–572. - PubMed
-
- Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24:266–268. - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources