Oral Misoprostol Solution in Comparison to Vaginal Misoprostol in Induction of Labor

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

Titrated oral misoprostol solution versus vaginal misoprostol for labor induction in primi gravid ladies

QJM ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 113 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I M Abdalfattah ◽  
W E Mohammed ◽  
A A El-gaml
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Tap Water ◽  
Maternity Hospital ◽  
Labor Induction ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Cervical Ripening ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Solution Versus ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

Abstract Background It is now generally accepted that the uterine cervix plays an important role during pregnancy and labor and that it depends on an active ripening process within the cervix; which is necessary for successful labor induction. Aim of the Work to test the safety and efficacy of titrated oral misoprostol compared to vaginal misoprostol for labor induction in term gravid ladies. Patients and Methods This prospective, single-blinded randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted at Ain-Shams University Maternity Hospital during the period between August 2017 and August 2018. 120 pregnant women planned for induction of labor were recruited in the study according to the inclusion / exclusion criteria. Subjects included in the study were randomized into two groups: patients who received oral 200 ug misoprostol in 200 ml water titrated over 24 hours and placebo tablets vaginally which resemble vagiprost tablets (25 microgram misoprostol) and the second group contained pients who received vaginal misoprostol 25microg maximum four doses, and placebo solution of 200 ml of tap water. Results titrated oral misoprostol is as effective in promoting cervical ripening and inducing labor as intravaginal misoprostol, oral Misoprostol has a similar maternal and perinatal safety profile to vaginal misoprostol. Conclusion This new approach to oral misoprostol administration was successful in minimizing the risk of uterine hyper-stimulation, which has been a feature of misoprostol use for induction of labor, at the expense of a somewhat slower response. Oral Misoprostol has a similar maternal and perinatal safety profile compared to vaginal misoprostol.

scholarly journals Efficacy of 50µg oral misoprostol versus 25µg vaginal misoprostol in induction of labor

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 1782
Author(s):  
Beenakumari R. ◽  
Radhamani Mavunkal Viswanathan ◽  
Nithya R.
Keyword(s):  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Maternal Complications ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Oral Group ◽  
Uterine Hyperstimulation ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

Background: Misoprostol is the latest drug for induction of labour which is cheap and stable at room temperature. Our study was conducted to test the efficacy of misoprostol for labor induction through oral and vaginal route.Methods: 250 women who required induction of labor at Govt. Medical College, Kottayam was included in this study. Both oral misoprostol 50µg and vaginal misoprostol 25µg 4 hourly upto maximum of four doses were used for induction of labor as per consultant’s preference. Out of these 125 patients were selected for study in both groups. Singleton term pregnancies with cephalic presentation were selected. The mean induction pain interval, induction delivery interval, mode of delivery, maternal complications like uterine contraction abnormalities, neonatal complications were observed.Results: Induction to pain interval was shorter in oral misoprostol group compared to vaginal misoprostol group (2.48+1.3 hours vs. 3.91+2.17 hours P ≤0.001). But the mean induction to delivery interval was comparable in both groups (12.98±3.04hrs vs. 12.59±3.28 hrs.) Vaginal delivery and cesarean section rate in both groups were comparable. The oral group required more number of misoprostol (>2 misoprostol 38.4% in oral 25.6% in vaginal p=0.030). There was insignificant increased incidence of uterine hyperstimulation in vaginal group. The neonatal outcome was comparable.Conclusions: Misoprostol administered either by oral or vaginal route was equally effective in induction of labor and found to be safe.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Orally Administered Misoprostol With Vaginally Administered Misoprostol For Cervical Ripening And Labour Induction

KYAMC Journal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 668-672 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohana Siddique ◽  
Muhammad Jahangir Howlader ◽  
Joysree Saha ◽  
Kazi Shahnaz Begum
Keyword(s):  
Mode Of Delivery ◽  
Cervical Ripening ◽  
Labour Induction ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Oral Group ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Duration Of Pregnancy

Objective: To compare efficacy and safety of oral misoprostol over vaginal misoprostol for labour induction.Materials and Methods: This is a cross sectional interventional hospital based comparative study which was carried in the department of Obstetrics and Gynecology in DMCH from 01.07.2008 to 31.12.2008.Results: Almost equal number of patients delivered vaginally spontaneously in both group, there is no association between route of administration and mode of delivery. Nausea,vomiting occurred more in oral group and uterine hypertonicity more in vaginal group.Conclusion: In this study, 50 patients were randomly selected for oral group and 50 patients for vaginal group. There were no significant differences regarding age, duration of pregnancy, Bishop's score and indication of induction of labour.KYAMC Journal Vol. 7, No.-1, Jul 2016, Page 668-672

Induction of labor by vaginal misoprostol in patients with previous cesarean delivery

1999 ◽  
Vol 78 (7) ◽  
pp. 653-654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuela Cunha ◽  
Antonio Bugalho ◽  
Cassimo Bique ◽  
Staffan Bergström
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Delivery ◽  
Induction Of Labor ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Previous Cesarean

scholarly journals Comparison of vaginal and oral misoprostol, for the induction of labour in women with intra-uterine foetal death

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. 2900
Author(s):  
Kala K. ◽  
Anupama V. Rani ◽  
Dharmavijaya M. N. ◽  
Umashankar K. M.
Keyword(s):  
Prostaglandin E1 ◽  
Post Partum ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Delivery Time ◽  
Foetal Death ◽  
Tertiary Institution ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Successful Induction ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

Background: Misoprostol is a prostaglandin E1 analogue, a methyl-ester of prostaglandin E1 additionally methylated at C-16. Misoprostol is an effective myometrial stimulant of pregnant uterus, selectively binding to prostanoid receptors. The objective of the study was to compare the efficacy of vaginal and oral misoprostol for the induction of labour in women with intra-uterine foetal death (IUFD).Methods: A prospective randomised clinical trial, comparing 50µg oral and 50µg vaginal misoprostol, six hourlies for a maximum of four doses for the induction of labour in women with IUFD. All patients with IUFD after 28 weeks without previous uterine surgeries, without contraindications for prostaglandins are included in the study. The study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology MVJ Medical College and Research Hospital, Hoskote. Bangalore from June 2012 to June 2015. It is a tertiary institution serving predominantly rural population. The primary outcome measure was the induction to delivery time, secondary all complications were noted.Results: Twenty-five women were randomised to the vaginal route and twenty-five to the oral route. The induction to delivery time was longer with vaginal misoprostol 10.5±4.03 compared to oral misoprostol (9.58±4.9). There was no significant difference in the amount of misoprostol needed to achieve successful induction in the two groups. 3 patients needed oxytocin augmentation to complete the induction of labour. There were no cases of failed induction. The systemic side effects (shivering, diarrhoea, vomiting and pyrexia) were more common with oral misoprostol (44.5%) compared to vaginal misoprostol (20%).Conclusions: Oral misoprostol achieved successful induction of labour in women with IUFD in a shorter time than vaginal misoprostol. Both routes are equally effective in termination of pregnancy. Sublingual route is easy to administer, patient compliant, no need for internal examination, less chance of labour dysfunction, less chance of post-partum sepsis.

scholarly journals Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 955-958 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elham Mohammadi ◽  
Geetha Jayaprakash ◽  
Afshin Shiva ◽  
Nader Motallebzadeh
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Statistical Difference ◽  
Missed Abortion ◽  
Patient’S Satisfaction ◽  
Patients Satisfaction ◽  
Satisfaction Rate ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Surgical Evacuation ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol

BACKGROUND: In recent years’ medical management with misoprostol is an effective alternative to surgical evacuation. But there is a dearth of evidence to reveal the effectiveness of the different routes of misoprostol and satisfaction rate among the patients treated with these routes. AIM: This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and patient’s satisfaction rate of vaginal versus oral misoprostol. METHODS: It was a prospective non-interventional study. One hundred women of having missed abortion confirmed by ultrasonography examination were enrolled in the trial. Fifty-eight subjects were administered 200 mcg of oral and 42 subjects received 200 mcg of vaginal misoprostol every four hours up to four doses. If complete expulsion did not occur 12 hours after the last dose, the surgical evacuation was done. RESULTS: There was no significant statistical difference between the effectiveness of treatment with vaginal (78.57%) and oral misoprostol (79.31%) (p = 0.928). The difference between Patients’ satisfaction at the time of discharge for the vaginal group (64.29%) and oral group (65.52%) was not statistically significant (P = 0.991). There was an increase in patients’ satisfaction for both groups at the follow-up session, but still, the difference was not significant (P = 0.897). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that there is no statistical difference between the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of oral and vaginal misoprostol in the treatment of missed abortion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document