A STUDY OF VAGINAL MISOPROSTOL TABLET VERSUS INTRACERVICAL DINOPROSTONE FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR

2021 ◽  
pp. 50-52
Author(s):  
P. Shabana ◽  
R. Asha Latha ◽  
N. M. Riyaz Riyaz
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effective ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Group 13 ◽  
Group 12 ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Nicu Admission ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B

Background:Induction of labour is the process of initiating the labour by articial means post 24 weeks of gestation. This study was undertaken to compare the efcacy and safety of vaginal Misoprostol [25-50ug] with intracervical Dinoprostone gel (0.5mg) for induction of labour at term in terms of efcacy of drug, feto-maternal outcome, side effects and complications of drugs. Methods: 400 nulliparas at term admitted in the OBG ward were included in this study. They were randomly allocated to two groups A& B. Group A (200 women) received 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, rates of instrumental and LSCS delivery, need for NICU care and cost-effectiveness. ADRs, if any were documented and proper care taken. Results: The mean induction to delivery interval was less in the Misoprostol group than Dinoprostone group (12 hrs vs. 22 hrs). 82% patients delivered in the rst 24 hrs in Misoprostol group compared to 54 % patients in Dinoprostone group. Group A had a higher success rate (80% vs.75%) and also required less augmentation of labor ( 35% vs. 65%) compared to group B. Need for LSCS was also lower in Misoprostol group (13% vs. 18%). 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 rst 24 hrs of induction and a reduced need of augmentation of labor with oxytocin. There was no signicant difference in the rate of caesarean section, hyper-stimulation syndrome, neonatal and maternal morbidity between the two groups. Thus, Misoprostol appears to be safer, cheaper and more efcacious alternative for induction of labor especially for non-fetal indications as compared to Dinoprostone gel.

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.

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 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 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 Oral and vaginal route of misoprostol for induction of labour: a comparative study

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 1956
Author(s):  
Deepti D. Sharma ◽  
Kavita A. Chandnani
Keyword(s):  
Cesarean Section ◽  
Vaginal Delivery ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Vaginal Route ◽  
Oral Misoprostol ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B ◽  
To Receive

Background: Induction of labour can be defined as “Artificial initiation of uterine contractions before the onset of spontaneous labour, after the period of viability, by any methods, for purpose of vaginal delivery.” The key factor for a successful induction is the status of cervix, its form, consistency and dilatation which is determined by the Bishop score. In case of unfavourable cervix or in the pregnancies remote from the term; prostaglandins are more effective than any other method of induction. Introduction of misoprostol, PGE1 analogue, for the induction of labour in 1993 and its approval for clinical use by ACOG (American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology) in 1999 has been the most significant advancement. It is the latest drug for induction of labour which is cheap and stable at room temperature and is being used worldwide in different doses and by various routes. We compared the most commonly preferred two routes; vaginal and oral in terms of success of induction and noted the adverse events and side effects in both routes.Methods: This was a prospective comparative study carried out at SBKSMIRC (Shrimati Bhikhiben Kanjibhai Shah Medical Institute and Research Centre), Dhiraj general hospital, Vadodara, Gujarat, 200 patients who required induction of labour were recruited after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria and were randomly divided in two groups- Group A meant to receive 50µg oral misoprostol, Group B - meant to receive 25µg vaginal misoprostol repeated 4 hourly up to maximum of five doses. Progress of labour was charted on the partograph. The mean induction delivery interval, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes and complications were observed.Results: The mean induction to delivery interval was significantly less in vaginal group than oral (23.3±12.4 hours in oral vs. 17.3±10 hours in vaginal). Vaginal delivery and cesarean section rates were comparable in both groups (76% in Group A vs. 72% in Group B for vaginal delivery, 18% vs. 20% for Cesarean section, respectively). 58% patients in Group A required more than two doses as compared to 39% in group B, though the difference was statistically not significant. Significant number of patients required added oxytocin administration in Group A (72%). No major complications or adverse events were observed. Neonatal hyperbilirubinemia was seen more in Group A.Conclusions: Both Oral misoprostol in a dose of 50μg and vaginal misoprostol 25 μg every four hours, to a maximum of five doses, have the potential to induce labour safely and effectively. The vaginal route however is beneficial in effecting delivery in lesser time with few numbers of doses as compared to oral route.

scholarly journals A comparative study of 25µg versus 50µg vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term premature rupture of membrane

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 1511
Author(s):  
Renu K. Sinha ◽  
Santoshi Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
P Value ◽  
Premature Rupture ◽  
Spontaneous Vaginal Delivery ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Group B ◽  
Foetal Infection

Background: At term, infection remains the most serious complication associated with PROM for the mother and the neonate Induction of labour significantly reduces the risk of maternal and foetal infection. This randomized comparative study has been done to compare the effectiveness and safety of low and high dosage (25 mcg and 50mcg) regimen of vaginal misoprostol for induction in term PROM patients.Methods: At term, infection remains the most serious complication associated with PROM for the mother and the neonate Induction of labour significantly reduces the risk of maternal and foetal infection. This randomized comparative study has been done to compare the effectiveness and safety of low and high dosage (25 mcg and 50mcg) regimen of vaginal misoprostol for induction in term PROM patients.Results: PROM to delivery interval was significantly shorter with 50mcg vaginal misoprostol as compared to 25 mcg vaginal misoprostol (15.71±3.29 hours vs. 18.23±3.23 hours, (p value = 0.0023) Number of doses required was less with 50mcg vaginal misoprostol group as compared to 25mcg vaginal misoprostol (1.22±0.42 vs. 1.91±0.80, p value <0.05). 83.6% women in group A and 69.09% women in group B underwent spontaneous vaginal delivery within 24 hours. 3.64% women in group A and 7.27% in group B had instrumental delivery. Caesarean section was performed in 12.27% cases in group A and 23.64% cases in group B. The complication rate was comparable.Conclusions: 50mcg vaginal misoprostol is more effective and safe for induction of labour at term PROM as compared to 25 mcg vaginal misoprostol 

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 Role of Combined Mifepristone and Misoprostol Verses Misoprostol Alone in Induction of Labour in Patients with Intrauterine Foetal Death - a Randomized Comparison Between their Outcome

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-54
Author(s):  
Sharmin Abbasi ◽  
Sehereen Farhad Siddiqua ◽  
Mohammad Noor A Alam ◽  
Suha Jesmin ◽  
Md Mahmudur Rahman Siddiqui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fetal Death ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Medical College Hospital ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Intrauterine Fetal Death ◽  
College Hospital ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Background: Intrauterine fetal death is means- intrapartum death after the fetus has reached the age of viability8. As in IUFD journey, labor pain will be fruitless. So, it is of utmost importance to search for the method which can reduce hours of pain in labor of IUFD cases.Metarials Methods: In this research work patients divided in two groups. Induction of labour in one group was given by combination of mifepristone and misoprostol other group by misoprostol only and we try to find out the best method. To compare the effectiveness, induction to delivery interval, safety and side effects of combination of mifepristone and misoprostol versus conventional use of misoprostol alone in induction of labour in patients with intrauterine fetal death. It is a Prospective randomized comparative study in Anwer Khan Modern Medical College Hospital and Dhaka Medical College Hospital among 70 patients with IUFD after 28 weeks of gestation during January 2014- January 2016.Result: We allowed the patients up to third gravid and after 28 weeks of gestation. Patients were grouped as Group A(35) & Group B (35). In Group A Induction was given by single oral dose of 200 mg mifepristone, and after 48 hours, tab. Misoprostol in post. fornix started if <34 weeks-100 ?gm dose and >34 weeks-50 ?gm dose. Doses were repeated every 6 hourly intervals if required. In Group B Induction was given by 100 ?gm misoprostol at 6 hourly interval in post. Fornix. In both groups we allowed misoprostol maximum 600 ?gm. Oxytocin was given for augmentation if needed. The two study groups did not differ demographically. Induction to delivery time was shorter with combined regimen group (P<0.001). Induction to delivery interval ranges from 10-12 hours in mifepristone plus misoprostole group.In only misoprostol group it was about 24-26 hours. Doses of misoprostol was lower in combined group (P<0.001). 4 patients need Oxytocin for augmentation in only misoprostol group. In combined group oxytocin was not needed. The two groups did not differ as regards complications experienced during labour and delivery significantly. In overall out come 2 failed induction in misoprostol only group but not in combinedgroup.Conclusion: In Induction of IUFD mifepriston plus misoprostol is an effective combined group. It is safe, non invasive, easily tolerable, highly cost effective, had less induction to delivery interval, required less dose of misoprostol and no need of augmentation with oxytocin. So,the combined group is more effective than conventional regimen of misoprostol alone.Anwer Khan Modern Medical College Journal Vol. 8, No. 1: Jan 2017, P 50-54

scholarly journals Comparative study of intra vaginal misoprostol (PGE1) with intracervical dinoprostone (PGE2) gel for induction of labour

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 3769
Author(s):  
Bina M. Raval ◽  
Nainesh S. Zalavadiya ◽  
Pushpa A. Yadava ◽  
Shital T. Mehta
Keyword(s):  
Caesarean Section Rate ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Active Phase ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cervical Ripening ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Misoprostol Group ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Vaginal Misoprostol ◽  
Mean Time

Background: Labour is a final consequence of Pregnancy and is inevitable. The timing of labour may vary widely but it will happen sooner or later. The aim of the present research was to study the safety, efficacy and effect of intra vaginal Misoprostol and intra cervical Dinoprostone gel for induction of labour.Methods: 100 patients who required labour of induction were included in this prospective cross-sectional study from September 2017- March 2018. 50 patients of them received 25mcg tablet misoprostol intravaginal and 50 patients of them required 0.5mg intracervical dinoprostone gel and doses were repeated every 6 hourly for up to maximum 6 doses for Misoprostol and 3 doses for Dinoprostone gel.Results: The majority of patients had gestational age above 40 weeks and between 37-40 weeks in PGE2 and PGE1 group respectively. The mean time taken for the onset of labour was less in Misoprostol than in Dinoprostone group (43.22min v/s 1 hr40 min). The mean time taken for induction to active phase of labour (1hr 42min v/s 4hr 10min) and active phase to delivery (3hr 6min v/s 4hr54min) was less in Misoprostol than Dinoprostone group. The mean time required for induction to delivery was less in Misoprostol group (5hr 2min v/s 11hrs). Requirement of oxytocin for augmentation of labour was almost equal in both groups. Caesarean section rate was less in Misoprostol group (10% v/s 22%). Maternal side effects were minimal in either groups and neonatal outcome was good in both the groups.Conclusions: Both Misoprostol and Dinoprostone gel are safe, effective for cervical ripening and induction but Misoprostol is more cost effective and stable at room temperature.

scholarly journals A retrospective comparative study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mifepristone with misoprostol over misoprostol alone in induction in labor

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (12) ◽  
pp. 5140
Author(s):  
Reena Sharma ◽  
B. R. Sharma ◽  
Poojan Dogra
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Induction Of Labour ◽  
Cervical Ripening ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group B ◽  
Retrospective Comparative Study ◽  
Group 1

Background: The aim is to compare the improvement in pre-induction Bishop’s score, proportion of patients going in labor and induction–delivery interval after using the Misoprostol versus Mifepristone and Misoprostol as cervical ripening and labor inducing agent.Methods: It is retrospective comparative study conducted on 110 women. Women were randomized in group A and in group B of 55 patients in each group. Group A received tab Mifepristone 200 mg orally on day 1 followed by Misoprostol 25 ug after 48 hours and continued 6 hourly till maximum four tablets and group B patients received tablet Misoprostol 25ug and continued 25ug 6hrly maximum 4 doses. Women observed for improvement in Bishop‟s score, induction-delivery interval and requirement of subsequent doses of Misoprostol.Results: Present study concluded that tablet Mifepristone is an efficient cervical ripening and inducing agent of labor as pre-induction Bishop’s score was improved. 36.4%patients went into labor only with tablet Mifepristone. The mean induction-delivery interval was,19±12.2hrs in Group 1 as compare to 13.1±13.0 hrs in Group 2. Mean Bishop’s score observed in Group 1 were 2.5±1.78 and 1.67±1.25 in Group 2. It was observed that there was significant improvement in the Bishop’s score after giving Mifepristone to the patients; mean Bishop’s 24hrs after mifepristone were 4.03±1.80. Repeated dose of Misoprostol required in Group 1 was observed to be higher than group 2 as shown in table 8. Mean misoprostol doses required in group 1 was 2.56±1.15 as compared to 1.71±1.58 in group 2.Conclusions: Mifepristone with Misoprostol reduce the induction delivery interval and more potent in combination for induction of labour as compared to Misoprostol alone.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document