Oral or vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor
- PMID: 9061387
- DOI: 10.1016/s0020-7292(96)02805-6
Oral or vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor
Abstract
Objective: To compare vaginal versus oral misoprostol for induction of labor.
Method: Induction of labor was carried out in 40 women near term in two equal and randomized groups (according to a computer generated table) using misoprostol. Group I received vaginal misoprostol (100 micrograms) every 3 h while group II patients were given the same dose via the oral route. The dose was doubled if no response was detected under continuous cardiotocographic (CTG) tracings.
Result: The vaginal route of administration induced a higher success rate in a shorter time interval using a lower dose but was associated with more abnormal FHR patterns and instances of uterine hyperstimulation.
Conclusion: It is recommended to use the vaginal approach with cardiotocographic monitoring.
Similar articles
-
Comparative efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in labor induction at term: a randomized trial.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Jul;280(1):19-24. doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0843-9. Epub 2008 Nov 26. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009. PMID: 19034471 Clinical Trial.
-
Excessive uterine activity accompanying induced labor.Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Jun;97(6):926-31. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(01)01332-1. Obstet Gynecol. 2001. PMID: 11384698
-
Titrated oral compared with vaginal misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial.Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jan;111(1):119-25. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000297313.68644.71. Obstet Gynecol. 2008. PMID: 18165400 Clinical Trial.
-
Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labor: a systematic review.Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Feb;113(2 Pt 1):374-83. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181945859. Obstet Gynecol. 2009. PMID: 19155909
-
The efficacy and safety of oral and vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone on women experiencing labor: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis of 53 randomized controlled trials.Medicine (Baltimore). 2024 Oct 4;103(40):e39861. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000039861. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024. PMID: 39465774 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
A benefit-risk assessment of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction.Drug Saf. 2002;25(9):665-76. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200225090-00005. Drug Saf. 2002. PMID: 12137560 Review.
-
Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Oct 6;2010(10):CD000941. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000941.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010. PMID: 20927722 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023 Sep;308(3):727-775. doi: 10.1007/s00404-022-06867-9. Epub 2022 Dec 6. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023. PMID: 36472645 Free PMC article.
-
Labour induction with randomized comparison of oral and intravaginal misoprostol in post date multigravida women.Malays J Med Sci. 2009 Jan;16(1):34-8. Malays J Med Sci. 2009. PMID: 22589646 Free PMC article.
-
Oral Misoprostol Solution for Induction of Labour.J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2017 Apr;67(2):98-103. doi: 10.1007/s13224-016-0937-4. Epub 2016 Aug 29. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2017. PMID: 28405116 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources