Misoprostol for labour induction

Abstract

Oral and vaginal misoprostol are effective induction methods, but there is a delicate balance between a quicker labour and avoiding side effects. In randomised comparisons with balloon catheters, oral misoprostol resulted in more vaginal births in the first 24 h as well as fewer caesarean sections without an increase in hyperstimulation events. Vaginal misoprostol was most effective when used concurrently with a balloon catheter. In comparison with dinoprostone, oral misoprostol had lower rates of caesarean section and uterine hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes, but fewer babies were born vaginally within 24 h. In contrast, vaginal misoprostol resulted in more vaginal births within 24 h, with no significant differences in caesarean section rates. There were no differences in perinatal adverse events with either route. When oral and vaginal misoprostol were compared, vaginal misoprostol resulted in more vaginal births in the first 24 h, but with more maternal and neonatal complications.

Keywords: Induction; Labour; Misoprostol; Obstetrics.