Cervical ripening at term. A randomized and prospective study: Misoprotol versus dinoprostone
Keywords:
Cervical ripening ; Misoprostol ; Dinoprostone ; Delivery Randomized clinical trialAbstract
Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of cervical ripening at term by vaginal Misoprostol and Dinoprostone.Methods:We performed a prospective randomized study on cervical ripening with misoprostol and dinoprostone in the third trimester of pregnancy. 300 patients have been divided into two groups: one consisted by 150 patients who received Misoprostol (Cytotec ®) and the second consisted by 150 patients who received Dinoprostone (Prépidil ®).
Results: Analysis of our results allowed to reveal: a significant decrease in the time of entry into work for the Misoprostol group (9.08 hours versus 12.51 hours, p = 0.007), a significant reduction delivery time (14.48 hours versus 19.30 hours, p = 0.001). Moreover, the birth rate in the first 24 hours after the first dose was significantly higher in the Misoprostol group (86.7% versus 72.7%, p = 0.003). The use of oxytocin was significantly reduced with Misoprostol (44% versus 58.7%, p = 0.01). The mode of delivery was not influenced by membership in one or other of the two groups.
Conclusion: Misoprostol seems an interesting molecule for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Downloads
References
Agarwal N, Gupta A, Kriplani A, Bhatla N. Six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2003; 29:147-51.
C. Vayssière. Pour l'utilisation du Misoprostol dans le déclenchement du travail à terme en routine. Gynécol Obstét Fertil 2006; 34: 155-60.
EG. Papanikolaou, N. Plachouras, A. Drougia. Comparison of Misoprostol and Dinoprostone for elective induction of labour in nulliparous women at full term: A randomized prospective study. Reprod Biol Endoc 2004, 2:70
M. Elhassan, OA. Mirghani, I. Adam. Intra vaginal Misoprostol vs. Dinoprostone as cervical ripening and labor-inducing agents. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2004 ;85: 285-86.
Chamberlain JE, Natale R Schmuck ML. Efficacy and patient satisfaction with outpatient prostaglandin E2 versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening- a randomized trial. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 1998; 20:1093-9.
C. Thornton, M. Whaites. Protocol audit of dinoprostone gel induction of labour Aust. Mid. J.ACM 2004; 17: 22-26.
JK. Chyu, HT. Strassner. Prostaglandin E2 for cervical ripening: A randomised comparison of cervidil versus Prépidil. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 606-11.
S. Hidar, M. Bibi, M. Jerbi, et al. Apport de l'administration intracervicale de PGE2 dans les ruptures prématurées des membranes à terme. J Gynécol Obstet Biol Reprod 2000; 29: 607-13.
A. Bugalho, C. Bique, F. Machungo, A. Faúndes. Low-dose vaginal Misoprostol for induction of labor with a live fetus. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1995; 49: 149-55.
P. Rozenberg, S. Chevret, MV. Sénat, F. Bretelle. A randomized trial that compared intravaginal Misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal insert in pregnancies at high risk of fetal distress. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:247-53.
A. Megalo, P. Petignat, P. Hohlfeld. Influence of misoprostol or prostaglandin E2 for induction of labor on the incidence of pathological CTG tracing: a randomized trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004; 116: 34-38.
L. Kolderup, L. McLean, K. Grullon. Misoprostol is more efficacious for labor induction than prostaglandin E2, but is it associated with more risk? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 180:1543-50.
P. Rozenberg, S. Chevret, MV. Sénat, F. Bretelle. A randomized trial that compared intravaginal Misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal insert in pregnancies at high risk of fetal distress. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004;191:247-53.
Patrick S. Ramsey, Denise Y. Harris, Paul L. Ogburn.Comparative efficacy and cost of the prostaglandin analogs dinoprostone and Misoprostol as labor preinduction agents. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188:560-5.
S. Zeteroglu, GH. Sahin, HA. Sahin. Induction of labor with misoprostol in pregnancies with advanced maternal age. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2006;129: 140-44.
Has R, Batukan C, Ermis H, Cevher F, Araman A, Kilic G. Comparison of 25 and 50 ÃŒg vaginally administered Misoprostol for pre-induction of cervical ripening and labour induction. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2002;53:16-21.
El Cherbiny MT, El Gharieb IH, Gewely HA.Vaginal Misoprostol for induction of labor: 25 vs 50 μg dose regimen. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2001; 72:25-30.
William F, Barbara L, Terry F, Denis C. Pharmacokinetics of a Controlled-Release Misoprostol Vaginal Insert at Term. J soc Gynecol Invest 2006; 13: 112-17.
KG Danielsson, L Marions, A Rodriguez, Spur BW, Wong PY, Bygdeman M. Comparison Between Oral and Vaginal Administration of Misoprostol on Uterine Contractility. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93:275-80.
Shetty A, Livingstone I, Asharya S, Rice P, Danelian P, Templeton A. Oral Misoprostol (100 μg) versus vaginal Misoprostol (25 μg) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2003; 82: 1103.
Alferevic Z. Oral Misoprostol for induction of labour (Cochrane review). Cochrane Database Rev. 2001; 2.
A. Bartusevicius, E. Barcaite, R.Nadisauskiene. Oral, vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2005; 91:2-9.
ML. Rochelle, VL. Holt, TR. Easterling. Risk of Uterine Rupture during Labor among Women with a Prior Cesarean Delivery. N Eng J Med 2001; 345:3-8.
Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz A, Wears R. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: A meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89: 633-42.
Farah LA, Sanchez-Ramos L, Cesar R, GO Del Valle. Randomized trial of two doses of the prostaglandin E1 analogue Misoprostol for labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 364-71.
Mbele A, Makin JD, Pattinson RC. Can the outcome of induction of labour with oral Misoprostol be predicted? SAMJ 2007; 97:234-38.
Frank J, Huffaker J. Labor induction with intra vaginal Misoprostol versus intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel (Prépidil gel): Randomized comparison. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173:1137-42.
Ramsey P, Paul L, Ogburn P, Denise Y, Robert H. Effect of vaginal pH on efficacy of the dinoprostone gel for cervical ripening/labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 187: 143- 49.
Joan M, David C, Kimberly D, Kelly A, Donna H. Excessive Uterine Activity Accompanying Induced Labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2001 ; 97 : 926-31
E.J. Langenegger, H.J. Odendaal, D. Grové. Oral Misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for induction of labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2005;88 : 242-48.
Kruse B, Poppema S, Creinin M, Paul M. Management of side effects and complications in medical abortion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 183: 65-75.
