- Visibility 578 Views
- Downloads 664 Downloads
- Permissions
- DOI 10.18231/j.ijogr.v.12.i.3.33
-
CrossMark
The study of low dose oral misoprostol solution and its comparison with intracervical dinoprostone gel for induction of labour
- Author Details:
-
Neelam Singh
-
Mohita Agarwal
-
Urvashi Verma *
Urvashi Verma *
Background: Induction of labour is defined as iatrogenic stimulation of uterine contractions to accomplish delivery prior to the onset of spontaneous labour aimed at delivery by vaginal route. Dinoprostone has been used successfully for years as an agent for induction of labour. Misoprostol as an agent for induction of labour agent has rapidly gained popularity because it is inexpensive, stable at ambient temperatures, and easier to administer in comparison to dinoprostone and oxytocin.
Materials and Methods: During the study period 220 antenatal cases were randomly allocated into two groups consisted of 110 cases each group. One group received low dose oral misoprostol solution and other group received intracervical dinoprostone gel for induction of labour. All cases were analyzed and outcomes were evaluated.
Results: Successful induction was obtained in majority of cases in both the groups. However, misoprostol was more effective in inducing labour, improving the bishop score and less need for oxytocin augmentation then dinoprostone. Mean induction delivery rate was less in misoprostol group in both nulliparous and multiparous women. Cases with age less than equal to 30 years had a better induction delivery in misoprostol group. Induction done for the reason of post term pregnancy and pre-mature rupture of membrane had better delivery results in misoprostol group. Similarly, irrespective of period of gestation misoprostol had a significantly lower induction delivery duration.
Conclusion: Misoprost as a drug for induction of labour in low dose oral solution is as effective as the standard dinoprostone.
References
- Wang X, Yang A, Ma Q, Li X, Qin L, Tongqiang H. Comparative study of titrated oral misoprostol solution and vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction at term pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016;294(3):495–503.
- Weeks AD, Navaratnam K, Alfirevic Z. Simplifying oral misoprostol protocols for the induction of labour. BJOG. 2017;124(11):1642–5.
- Keirse MJ. Prostaglandins in preinduction cervical ripening. Meta- analysis of worldwide clinical experience. J Reprod Med. 1993;38(1 Suppl):89-100.
- Rouzi AA, Alsahly N, Alamoudi R, Almansouri N, Alsinani N, Alkafy S, et al. Randomized clinical trial between hourly titrated and 2 hourly static oral misoprostol solution for induction of labour. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216(4):405.e1–6.
- Rouzi AA, Alsibiani S, Mansouri N, Alsinani N, Darhouse K. Randomized clinical trial between hourly titrated oral misoprostol and vaginal Dinoprostone for induction of labour. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(1):56.e1–6.
- Mbaluka CM, Kamau K, Karanja JG, Mugo N. Effectiveness and safety of 2-hourly 20 mcg oral misoprostol solution compared to standard intravenous oxytocin in labour induction due to pre-labour rupture of membranes at term: a randomised clinical trial at Kenyatta National Hospital. East Afr Med J. 2014;91(9):303–10.
- Parmeela, Sharma KD. Comparison between use of oral misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2018;68(2):88–92.
- Kafy S. Oral Misoprostol 2 Hourly for Labor Induction. Open J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;8(06):553.
- Papanikolaou EG, Plachouras N, Drougia A, Andronikou S, Vlachou C, Stefos T, et al. Comparison of misoprostol and dinoprostone for elective induction of labour in nulliparous women at full term: a randomized prospective study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2004;2:70.
- Cheng SY, Ming H, Lee JC. Titrated oral compared with vaginal misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(1):119–25.
- Alfirevic Z, Aflaifel N, Weeks A. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;13;(6):CD001338.
- O. Lapuente-Ocamica, L. Ugarte, A. Lopez-Picado et al. Efficacy and safety of administering oral misoprostol by titration compared to vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19:14.
- Souza AS, Feitosa FE, Costa AA, Pereira AP, Carvalho AS, Paixão RM, Katz L, Amorim MM. Titrated oral misoprostol solution versus vaginal misoprostol for labor induction. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2013;123(3):207–12.
- Aceituno Velasco L, Sanchez Barroso MT, Segura García MH, Gonzalez Acosta V, De la Fuente Pedrosa R, Barqueros Ramirez A, et al. Efficacy and safety of oral solution dosed misoprostol versus misoprostol vaginally in labour induction. Open J Ostet Gynecol. 2013;3(09):673–9.
- Alfirevic Z, Keeney E, Dowswell T, Welton NJ, Medley N, Dias S, et al. Methods to induce labour: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost -effectiveness analysis. BJOG. 2016;123(9):1462–70.