Combined Use of Vaginal Misoprostol with Intracervical Foley Catheter Versus Vaginal Misoprostol alone in Induction of Labor at Term Pregnancy

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled Hassan Swidan ◽  
Ahmed Abdel Shafy El-Shahawy ◽  
; Ahmed Mohamed Abbass ◽  
Huda Mohamed Elsayed Mohamed
Keyword(s):  
Foley Catheter ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
Maternity Hospital ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Term Pregnancy ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Abstract Background Induction of labor should be used in the most efficient way possible that will result in a favorable obstetric outcome with minimum fetal morbidity. Objectives The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol alone versus intra cervical Foley catheter combined with vaginal misoprostol in induction of labor at term pregnancy. Methods This study was conducted at Obstetrics & Gynecology Department; Ain Shams University, Maternity Hospital in the period between May 2017 to October 2017. The total number of patients studied was 120 patients, divided into two groups; the first group (A) included 60 patients who received vaginal misoprostol, the second group (B) included 60 patients who received vaginal misoprostol combined with trans cervical Foley catheter. Results The current study found that the combined group has a better chance for NVD 88.3% versus 78.3% in misoprostol alone group, a lesser probability to CS 11.7% in combined group versus 21.7% in misoprostol alone group and a shorter induction delivery interval within 12 hours after induction (81.6% in combined group versus 59.5% in misoprostol group). Regarding the effect of both methods on fetal safety, we found that non reassuring FHR was more common in combined group 8.3% than misoprostol alone group 1.7% but it’s statistically non-significant. There was statistically significant increase in tachysystole in combined group 28.3% versus 13.3% in misoprostol alone group. However, dystocia was more common in misoprostol group 15% than combined group 3.3% that is also statistically significant. Conclusion Both methods can be used in induction of labor at term pregnancy without forgetting the precautions and close observation to the mother and the fetus. Combined method results in a shorter induction-to delivery time, but misoprostol alone was safer for the mother and the fetus.

scholarly journals A study of vaginal misoprostol tablet versus intra cervical dinoprostone gel for the induction of labour

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 1404
Author(s):  
Chandni N. Badlani ◽  
Shraddha S. Shastri ◽  
Neelesh S. Risbud
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effective ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Nicu Admission ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B ◽  
To Receive

Background: This was a comparative study conducted to compare the effectiveness of 25 microgram of intravaginal misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone gel in terms of efficacy of drug, feto-maternal outcome, side effects and complications of drugs.Methods: 400 nulliparas at term, admitted for induction of labor were included in this study. They were randomly selected to receive either intravaginal misoprostol or intracervical dinoprostone gel. Group A (200 women) recieved tablet misoprostol 25 micrograms vaginally 4 hrly to a maximum of 3 doses and Group B (200 women) received dinoprostone gel 0.5mg intracervically 6 hrly to a maximum of 3 doses. Comparison was done in terms of Induction to delivery interval, need for augmentation, LSCS and instrumentation rate, need for NICU admissions and cost effectiveness.Results: The mean induction to delivery interval was less in the misoprostol group than dinoprostone group (12.5 hrs vs. 20 hrs). 78% patients delivered in the first 24 hrs in misoprostol group compared to 52 % patients in dinoprostone group. Group A had a higher success rate (81% vs.76%) and also required less augmentation of labor ( 30% vs. 60%) compared to group B. Need for LSCS was also lower in misoprostol group (11% vs. 16%). Need for instrumentation and incidence of NICU admission was similar in both groups. Misoprostol was more cost effective compared to dinoprostone.Conclusions: The misoprostol group had a shorter induction to delivery interval, more number of deliveries in the first 24 hrs of induction and a reduced need of augmentation of labor with oxytocin. There was no significant difference in the rate of caesarean section, hyper-stimulation syndrome, neonatal and maternal morbidity between the two groups. Thus, misoprosol appears to be safer, cheaper and more efficacious alternative for induction of labor especially for non-fetal indications as compared to dinoprostone gel.

scholarly journals A comparative study of vaginal misoprostol, dinoprostone gel, foley catheter, extra amniotic saline infusion along with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 3683
Author(s):  
Ektha M. Shetty ◽  
Asha Neravi
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Vaginal Delivery ◽  
Foley Catheter ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Saline Infusion ◽  
Bishop Score ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Nicu Admission ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

Background: Objective of this study was to study the effect of vaginal misoprostol, dinoprostone gel, foley catheter, extra amniotic saline infusion along with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term on maternal and fetal outcome.Methods: A one-year prospective observational study was conducted in the department of obstetrics and gynecology, SDM College of Medical Science and Hospital, Dharwad. Totally 100 postdated primigravida women with singleton gestation, vertex presentation and intact membrane who were induced with any four methods of induction 1) Tab. misoprostol 25 µg vaginally, 2) Intracervical dinoprostone gel, 3) Foley catheter and 4) Extra amniotic saline infusion along with tab. misoprostol 25 µg vaginally with 25 patients selected in each group, by random allocation technique and included in the study. Outcome measures analysed were the demographic profile, bishop score, induction to delivery interval, mode of delivery, maternal and fetal complications. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 17 software.Results: Mean induction delivery interval was significant between PGE1 versus foley group (p=0.0034). In this study, 60% patients in dinoprostone group had Vaginal delivery and 72% in the EASI + misoprostol group underwent cesarean section (p=0.0372). NICU admission was maximum with EASI + vaginal misoprostol group and minimum with vaginal misoprostol alone.Conclusions: The groups were comparable with respect to maternal age, bishop score and fetal weight. The vaginal misoprostol group had shortest induction delivery interval. The maximum number of patients in dinoprostone gel group underwent vaginal delivery with a highest cesarean section and NICU admission with the EASI + misoprostol group.

scholarly journals TO COMPARE THE EFFICACY OF PGE2 GEL AND 25ΜG OF INTRAVAGINAL MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOR IN TERM PROM

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sunita Maheshwari ◽  
Shweta Jinger
Keyword(s):  
Low Dose ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Cervical Ripening ◽  
Labour Induction ◽  
Term Pregnancy ◽  
Vaginal Tablet ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Background: Induction of labour is one of the most common obstetric interventions worldwide. The study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of 25µg (low dose) vaginal Misoprostol with intracervical Dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour in term pregnancy. Methods: For the purpose of this study, 100 term pregnancy patients (only primigravidae and second gravidae) were included who had spontaneous rupture of membrane before onset of labor. Data was collected from cases admitted in labor room at Pannadhay Mahila Chikitsalaya associated with RNT Medical College,Udaipur between July 2014 to July 2015. Results: Requirement of Oxytocin for augmentation of labor between group A and group B. It is evident from the table that oxytocin was required in only 16% of patients in group A, while 46% in group B. This indicates that requirement of oxytocin was significantly less in misoprostol group (P<0.001). Conclusion: This study was designed to assess efficacy of a 25 μg misoprostol vaginal tablet, Finding confirms that vaginal misoprostol tablet is as effective as dinoprostone in cervical ripening and labour induction with dinoprostone. Keywords: Cervical ripening, Dinoprostone, Labour induction, Low- dose misoprostol.

scholarly journals A comparative study of vaginal misoprostol versus oral misoprostol for induction of labour

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 2520
Author(s):  
Raj M. Mehta ◽  
Babulal S. Patel ◽  
Akshay C. Shah ◽  
Shashwat K. Jani ◽  
Vismay B. Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Background: Induction of labour defined as artificial initiation of uterine contractions before the onset of spontaneous labour, after the period of viability, by any methods. The successful outcome depends on the Bishop Score, maternal age and parity. Authors compared the most preferred two routes; vaginal and oral for induction and outcome, adverse events and side effects were noted.Methods: This was a prospective comparative study carried out at SVPIMSR, Ahmedabad, from January 2019 to June 2019, Gujarat, 100 patients who required induction were randomly divided in two groups- Group A received 25µg oral misoprostol, Group B - received 25µg vaginal misoprostol repeated 4 hourly up to maximum five doses in both groups. The induction to delivery interval, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcome and complications were observed.Results: The mean induction to delivery interval was less in vaginal group than oral (18.7 hours in vaginal versus 22.4 hours in oral). Vaginal delivery and caesarean section rates were comparable in both groups. 60% patients in Group A required more than two doses as compared to 36% in Group B. No major complications or adverse events were observed.Conclusions: Both oral misoprostol in a dose of 25μg and vaginal misoprostol 25μg every four hours, to a maximum of five doses, have safety and efficacy for induction. With The vaginal route, delivery occurs in less time and few doses required as compared to oral.

scholarly journals Comparison of efficacy of buccal versus vaginal misoprostol in first trimester induced abortion

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 3368
Author(s):  
Nida Khan ◽  
Anita M. Kant ◽  
Pooja C. Thukral ◽  
Mohammad Saquib
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
First Trimester ◽  
Comparable Efficacy ◽  
P Value ◽  
Vaginal Route ◽  
Trimester Abortion ◽  
Group A ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Background: To compare the effectiveness, side effects, and patient satisfaction of buccal versus vaginal misoprostol administration in first trimester abortions.Methods: Women opting for first trimester abortion received oral Mifepristone followed 48 hours latermisoprostol. Group A received Misoprostol via buccal route whereas group B received Misoprostol vaginally. A comparative analysis using SPSS was done.Results: Giving 800µg Misoprostol by either buccal or vaginal route after oral Mifepristone have comparable efficacy in terms of complete abortion rate (96% in buccal group versus 98% in vaginal group; p value = 0.495), failure rate being statistically similar (4% versus 2%). Drug abortion interval was comparable in the two groups. (11.16 hour in buccal group and 12.32 hours in vaginal group). Few side effects like nausea and vomiting, shivering, diarrohea was significantly higher with vaginal Misoprostol while abdominal cramps, altered taste were found more with the buccal group.Conclusions: Buccal Misoprostol is comfortable and easier to administer when compared to other routes and it has potential to be developed as a self-administered regimen. Buccal Misoprostol is as efficacious as vaginal Misoprostol with significantly lesser side effects up to 7 weeks of period of gestation.

scholarly journals A comparative study of intracervical foley’s catheter with oxytocin and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 3660
Author(s):  
Priyanka . ◽  
Shashi Bala Arya ◽  
Mirdu Sinha ◽  
J. K. Goel
Keyword(s):  
Pregnant Women ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Labour Induction ◽  
Bishop Score ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Successful Induction ◽  
Group A ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Foley’S Catheter ◽  
Group B

Background: Induction of labour implies stimulation of uterine contraction before spontaneous onset of labour with or without ruptured membranes. Aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intracervical Foley’s catheter with oxytocin and vaginal misoprostol for labour induction at term.Methods: A total 100 term pregnant women were chosen with bishop score <6 and divided into two groups: Foley’s catheter with oxytocin (Group A) and vaginal misoprostol (Group B). In Group A, a 16 F Foley’s catheter introduced beyond internal os and traction applied every 4 hourly to check for expulsion with simultaneous oxytocin infusion (2 mU/min up to 32 mU/min). In Group B, 25 mcg misoprostol administered every 4 hourly (maximum 6 doses or 150 mcg). Data analysed using SPSS software 20.0. A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results: No statistical difference found between demographic variables between two groups. Both primigravida and multigravida had poor pre-induction bishop score in both groups. Foley’s catheter (80%) and misoprostol group (96%) had successful induction and was statistically significant (p<0.05). Foley’s catheter took more time from induction-delivery both in primigravida and post-dated pregnant women. The rate of cesarean in Foley’s catheter group was high (62.5%) including 33% cases with failed induction. Foley’s catheter had less maternal and neonatal complications, less NICU admission as compared to misoprostol (p>0.05).Conclusions: Misoprostol was found better for successful induction, decreases induction-to-delivery interval and increases vaginal delivery as compared to Foley’s catheter but it needs constant supervision in view of hyperstimulation and tachysystole.

scholarly journals Induction of Labor Using Misoprostol With or Without Mifepristone in Intrauterine Deat

2014 ◽  
Vol 52 (194) ◽  
pp. 785-790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay Agrawal ◽  
Pritha Basnet ◽  
Achala Thakur ◽  
Pappu Rizal ◽  
Rubina Rai
Keyword(s):  
Fetal Death ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Intrauterine Fetal Death ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Group A ◽  
Pre Treatment ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B ◽  
Rapid Expulsion

Introduction: Rapid expulsion of fetus in intrauterine fetal death is usually requested without any medical grounds for it. So an efficient, safe method for induction of labor is required. The objective of this study is to determine if pre-treatment with mifepristone followed by induction of labor with misoprostol in late intrauterine fetal death is more efficacious. Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial in 100 patients in B.P.Koirala Institute of Health Sciences, Nepal from June 2011 to May 2013. Group A women received single oral dose of 200 mg mifepristone, followed by induction with vaginal misoprostol after 24 hours. Group B women were induced only with vaginal misoprostol. In each group, five doses of misoprostol was used four hourly. If first cycle was unsuccessful, after break of 12 hour, second course of misoprostol was started. The primary outcome was a measure of induction to delivery time and vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Secondary outcome was to measure need of oxytocin and complications. Results: Maternal age, parity and period of gestation were comparable between groups. Number of misoprostol dose needed in group A was significantly less than group B. Mann Whitney U test showed, women in group A had significantly earlier onset of labor, however total induction to delivery interval was not significant. In group A, 85.7% delivered within 24 hours of first dose of misoprostol while in group B 70% delivered within 24 hours (p=0.07). More women in Group B required oxytocin. Conclusions: Pretreatment with mifepristone before induction of labor following late intrauterine fetal death is an effective and safe regimen. It appears to shorten the duration of induction to onset of labor.  Keywords:  induction of labor; intrauterine fetal death; mifepristone; misoprostol. 

scholarly journals Comparative study between sequential use of Foley catheter with vaginal misoprostol versus sequential use of oral mifepristone with vaginal misoprostol for second trimester medical abortion

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (11) ◽  
pp. 4545
Author(s):  
Michelle N. Fonseca ◽  
Vernica Sah
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Foley Catheter ◽  
Medical Abortion ◽  
Second Trimester ◽  
Trimester Abortion ◽  
Sequential Administration ◽  
Group A ◽  
Low Incidence ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Background: Abortions are one of the most commonly performed procedures in gynaecological departments worldwide. They are still a major problem in developing countries contributing to a significant percentage of maternal morbidity and mortality. The main objective of this study is to compare the efficacy, side effects and acceptability of intracervical Foley and oral Mifepristone both followed with sequential administration of vaginal misoprostol for second trimester medical abortion.Methods: This was a prospective randomized trial of 36 healthy women opting for termination of pregnancy with ultrasound confirmed intrauterine gestation between 12 to 20 completed weeks. Intracervical Foley catheter with administration of misoprostol (200µg) vaginally was done for Group A. Mifepristone 200mg was administered on day one followed by misoprostol (200µg) vaginally, 48 hours later, to Group B. Both groups received misoprostol (200µg) vaginally at 4 hourly intervals. Completeness of abortion was assessed, and surgical evacuation was performed, if abortion was found to be incomplete.Results: The two groups were comparable with respect to age, parity and gestational age. 83-89% of the women in both the groups had complete abortion. The mean induction abortion interval was 20.11 hours in Group A and 54.77 hours in Group B, which was statistically significant. Side effect profile was comparable in both groups however the intensity and the duration of persistence of pain was greater among patients from Group A.Conclusions: Authors conclude that medical abortions with both methods were found to be safe, effective, inexpensive and acceptable methods. Whereas a shorter induction abortion interval was observed in the Foley induction group, induction with mifepristone was the preferred regimen in second trimester abortion because of its high efficacy, low incidence of side effects, better tolerance by the patients and due to lower dose of misoprostol required following mifepristone administration.

TO COMPARE THE FETOMATERNAL OUTCOME OF ORAL MISOPROSTOL SOLUTION AND VAGINAL MISOPROSTOL TABLET FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR AT TERM IN THE DEPARTMENT OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, SMS MEDICAL COLLEGE, JAIPUR

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Neelam Bhardwaj ◽  
Parveen . ◽  
Prerna . ◽  
Neeta Meena ◽  
Prem .
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meconium Aspiration Syndrome ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Nicu Admission ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Background: Induction of labour is a common intervention, required in situations where continuation of pregnancy may be lifethreatening for the mother and/or fetus. In industrialized countries, the induction rate ranges from 10-25%. Methods: Randomized controlled trial was conducted at Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SMS Medical College, Jaipur. Results: APGAR score at 1 min and 5 minutes was 6.64 and 6.84 in oral misoprostol and vaginal misoprostol group respectively, while at 5 minutes it is 6.7 oral group and 7 of vaginal misoprostol group. 34% of cases need NICU admission in Group-A (Oral misoprostol) and 14% in Group-B (Vaginal misoprostol) group. Meconium aspiration syndrome which is present 10% of patients in Group-A (Oral Misoprostol) while it is present in 6% of patients in Group-B (Vaginal misoprostol). Conclusion: The lesser incidence of meconium-stained liquor and NICU admissions and fewer caesareans with better neonatal outcome in women induced with oral misoprostol outweigh its advantages over the vaginal misoprostol Keywords: Misoprostol, Labor, Induction, Fetomaternal outcome.

scholarly journals A study comparing vaginal misoprostol alone with vaginal misoprostol in combination with Foley catheter for cervical ripening and labour induction

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Binti R. Bhatiyani ◽  
Manisha R. Gandhewar ◽  
Swati Kapsikar ◽  
Pradip Gaikwad
Keyword(s):  
Foley Catheter ◽  
Active Phase ◽  
Fetal Distress ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Cervical Ripening ◽  
Labour Induction ◽  
Combination Group ◽  
Maternal Complications ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

Background: Induction of labor is a commonly practised intervention in modern obstetrics. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol alone with vaginal misoprostol in combination with Foley catheter for labour induction. It aims to assess the induction delivery interval, the outcome of labour, the incidence of instrumental delivery and Cesarean section. The neonatal outcomes and maternal complications would also be assessed.Methods: 105 women with singleton viable pregnancies of 28 weeks or more gestation with cephalic presentation, intact membranes and an unfavorable cervix (Bishops score less than 6) were randomly assigned to induction of labor using vaginal misoprostol or Foley catheter in combination with vaginal misoprostol. Women in the misoprostol only group received 25 micrograms of misoprostol per vagina every 4 hours for a maximum of six doses. Whereas women in the combination group received vaginal misoprostol and in addition Foley catheter was introduced through the cervix for 12 hours. Interruption of the trial was done in case of failure to enter the active phase of labour after 24 hours of induction, fetal distress, hyperstimulation, hypersensitivity to drugs.Results: The induction to delivery time was shorter in misoprostol group as compared to the Foley with misoprostol group by 3 hours. There was no significant change in Bishops score after induction with Foley in combination with misoprostol as compared to misoprostol alone. There was no increase in the maternal and fetal complications in the misoprostol group as compared to Foley with misoprostol.Conclusions: Misoprostol alone was more efficacious for ripening and inducing agent as compared to Foley in combination with misoprostol.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document