Vaginally administered misoprostol for outpatient cervical ripening in pregnancies complicated by diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE: To compare the use of vaginally administered misoprostol to placebo for outpatient labor induction in patients with diabetes. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-masked, controlled clinical trial, pregnant women with diabetes and gestational age of >38(1/2) weeks were randomized to receive 25 microg misoprostol or placebo vaginally on days 1 and 4 of a 7-day outpatient cervical ripening period. If necessary, inpatient labor induction was managed by using a standard protocol. RESULTS: Of 120 women included in the study, 57 received misoprostol and 63 received placebo. Most of the women had been diagnosed with gestational (Class A) diabetes. Similar numbers of misoprostol and placebo-treated women delivered within 7 days of the first dose (31/57 [54%] vs 36/63 [57%], P =.63). The mean (+/-SEM) interval from induction to delivery was similar (8530.5 minutes +/-1439.7 minutes vs 6712.5 minutes +/-606.4 minutes, P =.23). CONCLUSION: Vaginally administered misoprostol was no more effective than placebo in reducing the need for inpatient labor induction or the induction-delivery interval. Outpatient cervical ripening with use of vaginally administered misoprostol was well tolerated.     

Safety and efficacy of misoprostol orally and vaginally: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy accompanying oral and vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening. METHODS: One thousand four women with medical or obstetric indications for labor induction and unripe cervices were randomly assigned to receive oral or vaginal misoprostol. Initial doses of 200 microg oral and 50 microg vaginal misoprostol were increased to 300 microg oral and 100 microg vaginal after two doses, to a maximum of six doses. Misoprostol was given every 6 hours in both groups. We anticipated that 11% of women treated vaginally would require intervention during the ripening process. Intervention was defined as interruption of the ripening process before labor or Bishop score of 7 or a lack of response to six misoprostol doses. RESULTS: Five hundred three subjects were assigned to oral and 501 to vaginal administration. Oral misoprostol was associated with significantly higher frequencies of intervention (67 [13.3%] versus 42 [8.4%], P =.01), tachysystole (114 [23.6%] versus 85 [17.6%], P =.02), and hyperstimulation (90 [18.6%] versus 66 [13.7%], P =.04). There were no significant differences in cesarean rates (147 [29.2%] versus 120 [24.0%], P =.06), mean number of misoprostol doses used (1.5 versus 1.6, P =.18), or hours from drug administration to delivery (24.5 versus 25.4, P =.77) between the oral and vaginal groups, respectively. The numbers of deliveries between the groups within 24 hours was different (271 [56%] versus 290 [60%], P =.02), oral and vaginal, respectively. No adverse neonatal outcomes were noted. CONCLUSION: Oral misoprostol has similar efficacy as vaginal misoprostol but is associated with a higher frequency of excessive uterine contractility and intervention.     

A comparison of various routes and dosages of misoprostol for cervical ripening and the induction of labor

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of different routes of misoprostol administration for cervical ripening and the induction of labor. STUDY DESIGN: Three hundred thirty women at > or = 32 weeks gestation with a Bishop score < or = 6 and an indication for induction were randomized to 1 of 3 double-blinded groups: (1) 25 microg orally administered misoprostol plus 25 microg vaginally administered misoprostol, (2) orally administered placebo plus 25 microg vaginally administered misoprostol, or (3) 25 microg orally administered misoprostol plus vaginally administered placebo. Doses were repeated every 4 hours until onset of labor or a maximum of 12 doses were given. The primary outcome of the trial was vaginal delivery within 24 hours of the initiation of induction. Secondary outcomes were the time from induction to delivery, need for oxytocin augmentation, mode of delivery, frequency of side effects, and neonatal and maternal outcome. Analysis of variance, chi-square test, and logistic regression were used for analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in maternal characteristics or indications for induction. The percentage of women who achieved vaginal delivery within 24 hours was highest in the vaginally administered misoprostol group: 67% compared with 53% in the oral-plus-vaginal group (P < .05) and 36% in the oral group (P < .05). The median time to vaginal delivery was shorter in the vaginal and oral-plus-vaginal misoprostol groups, 13.5 hours and 14.3 hours, respectively, when compared with 23.9 hours in the oral group (P < .05). The rate of cesarean delivery was lowest in the vaginal misoprostol group (17% compared with 30% in the oral-plus-vaginal group and 32% in the oral group; P < .05). Uterine tachysystole occurred least frequently in the oral misoprostol group (10% compared with 32% in the vaginal group and 34% in the oral-plus-vaginal group; P < .05). Uterine hyperstimulation also occurred least frequently in the oral misopro-stol group (4% compared with 15% in the vaginal group and 22% in the oral-plus-vaginal group; P < .05). CONCLUSION: At the doses studied, induction of labor with vaginally administered misoprostol is more efficacious than either oral-plus-vaginal or oral-only route of administration.     

A comparison of orally administered misoprostol to intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women with favorable cervical examinations

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare orally administered misoprostol with intravenous oxytocin infusion for labor induction in women with favorable cervical examinations (defined as a Bishop score of 6 or more). STUDY DESIGN: One hundred ninety-eight women with indications for labor induction and favorable cervical examinations were assigned randomly to receive oral misoprostol or oxytocin induction. Misoprostol, 100 mg, was administered every 4 hours up to 6 doses, or intravenous oxytocin was administered by standardized protocol. RESULTS: One hundred ten (55.6%) women received misoprostol; 88 (44.4%) received intravenous oxytocin. There was no statistically significant difference in the average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery, being longer in the misoprostol group (789.4 +/- 510.2 minutes) than in the oxytocin group (654.0 +/- 338.2 minutes, P=.19, log-transformed data). Two women had tachysystole develop in each treatment group. More women in the misoprostol group experienced hyperstimulation (7/110, 6.4%) than in the oxytocin group (0/88, P=.02, Fisher exact test). Nine (8.1%) misoprostol-treated women and 8 (9.1%) oxytocin-treated women underwent cesarean deliveries (P=.82). There was a presumed uterine rupture in a misoprostol-treated multipara women. There were no statistically significant differences in neonatal outcomes between the groups. CONCLUSION: Oral misoprostol offers no benefit over intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women with favorable cervical examinations. It is associated with a higher likelihood of uterine hyperstimulation and may increase the risk of uterine rupture.     

A comparison of vaginally administered misoprostol with extra-amniotic saline solution infusion for cervical ripening and labor induction

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare intravaginal misoprostol with extra-amniotic saline solution infusion with concomitant oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in viable pregnancies. STUDY DESIGN: Two hundred women with indications for labor induction and unfavorable cervices were assigned randomly to vaginal misoprostol or extra-amniotic saline solution infusion. Twenty-five micrograms of misoprostol was administered every 4 hours up to six doses, followed by intravenous oxytocin administration. Patients who had received extra-amniotic saline solution infusion also received intravenous oxytocin along with a maximum 12-hour saline solution infusion through Foley catheters that were placed above the internal cervical os. RESULTS: One hundred women were randomly assigned to misoprostol, and 100 women were assigned randomly to extra-amniotic saline solution infusion. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was longer in the misoprostol group (1323.3 +/- 700.3 minutes) than in the extra-amniotic saline solution infusion group (970.4 +/- 502.7 minutes; P =.006, log transformed data). Abnormal fetal heart rate tracings were found in 30% of the patients who received misoprostol and in 19% of the patients who received extra-amniotic saline solution infusion (relative risk, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.4; P =.05). There was more tachysystole in the misoprostol group (8%) than in the extra-amniotic saline solution infusion group (1%; P =.02). There were no differences in the routes of deliveries or neonatal outcomes between groups. CONCLUSION: Extra-amniotic saline solution infusion with oxytocin administration appears more effective and is associated with fewer maternal complications than misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.     

Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for labor induction

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and effectiveness of vaginal with oral misoprostol for induction of labor. METHODS: A total of 107 women with clinical indication for induction were randomly assigned to receive oral or vaginal misoprostol. Doses of 100 microg of oral or 25 microg of vaginal misoprostol were given every 3-4 hours. If cervical ripening or active labor did not occur, repeated doses of oral (100-200 microg) or vaginal (25-50 microg) were given until labor was established. RESULTS: Fifty-nine women received oral misoprostol, and 48 received vaginal administration. Delivery time was similar for the vaginal and oral arms (1074 +/- 488 minutes versus 930 +/- 454 minutes, P =.11). Parity was significantly different (P =.04) for the vaginal and oral groups. The cesarean delivery rate was similar for the vaginal and oral arms (17% versus 15%, P =.72). The number of medication administrations was consistent between groups. Birth weight was not different for patients in the control and treatment groups (vaginal 3281 +/- 507 g versus oral 3359 +/- 541 g, P =.44). Chorioamnionitis and tachysystole were comparable for the oral and vaginal groups. There was no statistical difference in neonatal outcomes. Similar proportions of infants were admitted to the well baby nursery and intermediate care nursery. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that, in a closely supervised hospital setting with adequate monitoring, oral misoprostol has the potential to induce labor as safely and effectively as its vaginal analogue.     

Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor: a double-blind randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of oral misoprostol (50 microg) administered every 3 hours compared to vaginal misoprostol (50 microg) administered every 6 hours for induction of labor. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-blind randomized trial, 126 women received misoprostol (50 microg) either orally every 3 hours or vaginally every 6 hours for induction of labor. Outcomes included time from induction to delivery, oxytocin augmentation, incidence of hyperstimulation and tachysystole, mode of delivery, and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: Median time to delivery was shorter in those women who were receiving vaginal misoprostol (vaginal 14.3 hours vs oral 23.1 hours; P =.0004) and more women in the oral group required oxytocin augmentation of labor (73% vs 42%) (RR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29 to 3.06). The incidence of hyperstimulation was similar between the groups, but there was an increased incidence of tachysystole in the vaginal group (26.5% vs 9.7%)(RR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.16 to 6.51). There was no difference between the groups with respect to mode of delivery or neonatal outcome. CONCLUSION: Vaginal misoprostol administered every 6 hours is more effective for induction of labor than oral misoprostol administered every 3 hours. The higher rates of tachysystole with use of vaginal misoprostol in the current study warrant further investigation.     

Mifepristone for preinduction cervical ripening beyond 41 weeks' gestation: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of mifepristone with placebo on cervical ripening before labor induction in prolonged pregnancies. METHODS: One hundred eighty women with pregnancies beyond 41 weeks and undilated, uneffaced cervices were assigned randomly to receive mifepristone 200 mg or placebo and observed for 24 hours. We then gave intravaginal misoprostol 25 microg every 4 hours or intravenous oxytocin. We expected 60% of placebo-treated and 80% of mifepristone-treated women to deliver vaginally within 48 hours. RESULTS: Among 180 subjects, 97 received mifepristone and 83 received placebo. The mean interval (+/- standard deviation [SD]) from start of induction to delivery was 2209 +/- 698 minutes for mifepristone-treated subjects and 2671 +/- 884 minutes for placebo-treated subjects (P <.001, log-transformed data). Twelve (13. 6%) mifepristone-treated women and seven (10.8%) placebo-treated women delivered vaginally on day 1 (P =.60). After 24 hours, the median Bishop score for both groups was 3 (0-11) (P =.51). One hundred thirty-one subjects required misoprostol, 65 (67.0%) were mifepristone-treated women, and 66 (79.5%) placebo-treated women (P =.06). The median (range) oxytocin dose was 871.5 (0-22,174) mU for mifepristone-treated women and 2021.0 (0-24,750) mU for placebo-treated women (P =.02). Seventy-seven (87.5%) mifepristone-treated women and 46 (70.8%) placebo-treated women delivered vaginally 48 hours after the start of treatment (P =.01). There were nine cesareans in the mifepristone group and 18 in the placebo group (P =.02). More nonreassuring fetal heart rate patterns and uterine contractile abnormalities occurred in mifepristone-treated subjects. There were no statistically significant differences in neonatal outcomes between groups. CONCLUSION: Mifepristone had a modest effect on cervical ripening when given 24 hours before labor induction, appearing to reduce the need for misoprostol and oxytocin compared with placebo.     

Oral misoprostol vs. intravaginal prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening. A randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare orally administered misoprostol with intravaginal prostaglandin E2 for cervical ripening and labor induction. STUDY DESIGN: Patients presenting with medical or obstetric indications for labor induction whose Bishop's score was < or = 6 were randomly allocated to receive either 50 micrograms of oral misoprostol or 4 mg of intravaginal prostaglandin E2. If adequate cervical ripening (Bishop score of 9 or cervical dilatation of 3) or active labor did not ensue, repeat doses of each medication were administered every four hours. A maximum of six doses of either oral misoprostol or intravaginal prostaglandin E2 was permitted. Intravenous oxytocin was subsequently administered according to a standardized infusion protocol. RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled, with 29 randomized to the oral misoprostol arm and 31 to the prostaglandin E2 group. The data on 58 patients were eligible for analysis. Delivery occurred within 48 hours in 96.4% (27/28) of those administered oral misoprostol as compared to 76.7% (23/30) of those who received intravaginal prostaglandin E2 (P = .03). The mean time intervals from the start of induction to delivery were similar between the two groups (1,496 +/- 120 vs. 1,723 +/- 230 minutes, P = .40). No statistically significant differences existed between the two groups with respect to intrapartum complications, tachysystole, uterine hyperstimulation or adverse neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Oral administration of misoprostol is an effective alternative to intravaginal prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening.     

Oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the effectiveness, safety, and side effects of low-dose oral misoprostol with vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. STUDY DESIGN: Women with Bishop score 6 or less admitted for labor induction at term were eligible for this randomized controlled trial. Exclusion criteria were multiple pregnancy, breech, fetal distress, or previous uterine scar. The allocation to the oral misoprostol group (20 microg given every 2 hours increased to 40 microg depending on uterine contractions) or to the vaginal dinoprostone group (2 mg twice, 6 hours apart) was contained in a sealed, opaque, and consecutively numbered envelope. RESULTS: Two hundred women (100 in each group) were included. The proportion of vaginal delivery within 24 hours was 56% in the misoprostol group and 62% in the dinoprostone group (relative risk 0.90, 95% CI 0.72-1.14). The risk of cesarean section was 18% and 19%, respectively. The median interval to delivery, calculated from survival analysis, was longer in the misoprostol group (1305 minutes) compared with the dinoprostone group (1080 minutes). The log-rank test was not significant (P =.35). Uterine hyperstimulation occurred in 9% of women in the misoprostol group compared with 14% in the dinoprostone group (P =.27). The only significant difference in neonatal outcomes was a more frequent presence of thick meconium in the misoprostol group (P =.03). CONCLUSION: We found no difference in terms of effectiveness and safety between low-dose oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone used for induction of labor. This regimen avoids the excessive uterine contractility noted in previous studies, where higher doses of misoprostol were administered at longer intervals.     

Oral misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized comparison

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy, safety, and tolerance of oral misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. METHODS: Two hundred women were randomized to receive single doses of oral misoprostol 200 microg or 0.5 mg of dinoprostone intracervically every 6 hours for a maximum four doses. RESULTS: The intervals from administration of the drug to active phase of labor (11.1 hours [7-24] versus 15.8 hours [7.5-29.62], P =. 01), to delivery (14.0 hours [8.42-27.61] versus 20.2 hours [16.7-32. 8], P =.01), and to rupture of membranes (10.0 hours [4.95-24.7] versus 15.6 hours [8.2-29.2], P =.003) were significantly shorter in the misoprostol group. All those variables were not distributed normally, so results are presented as median and interquartile range. The rates of women who needed oxytocin (68% versus 52%, P =.03) and cesarean for failed induction (9% versus 1%, P =.01) were higher in the dinoprostone group. CONCLUSION: A single dose of 200 microg oral misoprostol was more effective for cervical ripening and labor induction than 0.5 mg of dinoprostone intracervically every 6 hours, with a maximum of four doses.     

Mifepristone versus vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical priming before first-trimester termination of pregnancy: a randomized, controlled study

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to compare the effectiveness of mifepristone orally administered at 24 or 48 hours before first-trimester vacuum aspiration abortion with that of vaginally administered misoprostol as a cervical priming agent. STUDY DESIGN: In a randomized comparative trial 90 women who requested surgical termination of pregnancy were randomly assigned to receive 200 mg mifepristone orally 24 or 48 hours before the operation or 800 microg misoprostol vaginally 2 to 4 hours before the operation. The main outcome measures were baseline cervical dilatation, cumulative force required to dilate the cervix to 9 mm, and intraoperative blood loss. RESULTS: The baseline cervical dilatation was significantly greater among women who received mifepristone 48 hours before the operation (P =.02). This group also required the least mechanical force to dilate the cervix (P =.06). There were no significant differences among the 3 groups in the intraoperative blood loss, in the operating time, or in patient acceptability. Side effects such as hot flushes and headaches were significantly higher among women who received mifepristone 24 or 48 hours before the operation than among those who received misoprostol (P =.01 and P =. 002, respectively). CONCLUSION: Mifepristone is an effective cervical priming agent when orally administered 48 hours before vacuum aspiration for termination of first-trimester pregnancy. Because of its cost and availability in comparison with misoprostol, however, selective use may have to be considered.     

The effect of vaginal pH on the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor

BACKGROUND: Misoprostol was reported to be an effective agent for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Our purpose was to evaluate whether vaginal pH affected the efficacy of misoprostol for induction of labor. METHODS: The vaginal pH of 103 women admitted for induction of labor were measured. According to the vaginal pH, two groups were generated, those with a vaginal pH <5 (n= 65), and those with a vaginal pH > or =5 (n=38). All women received intravaginal misoprostol tablets, 50 microg every 4 hours up to three doses. Further medication was not given after entry into active labor or spontaneous rupture of membranes. In cases of failed induction or arrest disorders oxytocin augmentation was used. RESULTS: The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was shorter, and oxytocin augmentation was required less commonly in the lower pH group. We did not find any significant difference in cesarean section rates, or incidence of adverse maternal or fetal outcome. CONCLUSION: Vaginal pH may affect the pharmacokinetics of vaginally administered misoprostol, and may cause an alteration in induction to delivery interval.     

The effect of tablet moistening on labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether a dosage of 50 microg of misoprostol tablets moistened with 3% acetic acid and administered intravaginally is more efficacious for labor induction than a similar dosage regimen using dry tablets. METHODS: A total of 177 women who presented with an indication for cervical ripening and labor induction were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: 1) intravaginal misoprostol in dry tablet form, or 2) intravaginal misoprostol moistened with 1 mL of 3% acetic acid solution. The primary outcome assessed was the interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery. To detect at least a 3.5-hour difference in the primary outcome with 80% power, 87 subjects were required in each group. RESULTS: Among 162 patients evaluated, 80 were allocated to the misoprostol dry group and 82 to the misoprostol moistened group. No significant difference was noted for the mean +/- standard deviation interval to vaginal delivery: 1130 +/- 636 minutes for the group who received dry tablets and 1004 +/- 636 minutes for those who received moistened misoprostol tablets (P =.25). Additionally, no statistically significant differences were noted between the groups with respect to need for oxytocin, proportion of patients delivered after a single dose, intrapartum complications (including tachysystole and uterine hyperstimulation), mode of delivery, or perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Tablet moistening with 3% acetic acid solution does not seem to improve the efficacy of intravaginally administered misoprostol for labor induction.     

Buccal versus intravaginal misoprostol administration for cervical ripening

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of misoprostol that is administered in the buccal pouch with the intravaginal route of administration. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred fifty-seven pregnant women with a singleton live gestation, Bishop score of <7, estimated fetal weight of <4500 g, and gestational age of >24 weeks were randomized to receive misoprostol that would be placed either in the buccal pouch or vagina every 6 hours. In the buccal group, after the first 2 doses of 200 microg, the dose was increased to 300 microg for the duration of the study (up to a total of 1600 microg). In the vaginal group, after the first 2 doses of 50 microg, the dose was increased to 100 microg for the duration of the study (up to a total of 500 microg). The primary outcome variable was the interval from the first dose to vaginal delivery. Power calculations indicated the need to enroll 71 patients in each arm of the study, which would allow for the detection of a 4-hour reduction in vaginal birth interval for buccal misoprostol. RESULTS: The hours from drug administration to vaginal delivery were similar between the buccal and vaginal groups (23.5 +/- 20.8 hours versus 21.3 +/- 13.4 hours), respectively. Thirty-five women (63%) versus 34 women (67%) delivered vaginally within 24 hours (P = not significant). The incidence of tachysystole was higher in the buccal group, 28 occurrences (38%) versus 15 occurrences (19%; P =.01). CONCLUSION: Buccal misoprostol is effective for cervical ripening but results in a higher incidence of tachysystole than does intravaginal administration.     

Vaginal misoprostol administration for cervical ripening and labor induction

Intravaginal misoprostol has been shown to be an effective agent for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Vaginal application of misoprostol has been reported in over 9000 women worldwide and seems to have safety profile similar to that of endocervically and intravaginally administered dinoprostone. Concern arises with the use of higher doses of intravaginal misoprostol (50 mcg or more) and the association with uterine contractile abnormalities and for this reason, use of low-dose misoprostol regimen has been recommended by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The recommendation is use of a 25-mcg dose of misoprostol inserted into the posterior vaginal fornix and repeated every 3 to 6 hours as needed. Misoprostol administration to women with prior cesarean births seems to increase the likelihood of uterine scar disruption and should not be used in these women. There are reports of uterine rupture in women with unscarred uteri treated with vaginally applied misoprostol. Therefore, all patients need to be monitored adequately after misoprostol administration. Although there is a growing body of data regarding the ambulatory use of intravaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening, its use for this purpose cannot be recommended outside of investigational protocols at this time because of concerns for maternal and neonatal safety.     

Factors affecting the likelihood of successful induction after intravaginal misoprostol application for cervical ripening and labor induction

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine whether maternal age, height and weight, parity, duration of pregnancy, cervical dilatation or Bishop score, and birth weight could be used to predict the likelihood of successful induction in women given intravaginal misoprostol. STUDY DESIGN: A computerized database was compiled of 1373 pregnancies in which intravaginal misoprostol was given for cervical ripening and labor induction. Most of these women were placed on investigational protocols in which the dose of misoprostol administered was 25 to 50 microg and the dosing intervals ranged from 3 to 6 hours. No more than 24 hours of administration was permitted. Induction was undertaken in women with unfavorable cervical examinations (Bishop scores of 4 or less) and without spontaneous labor or ruptured membranes. Univariate and stepwise multiple regression analyses were performed to identify those factors associated with successful induction, defined as vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction. RESULTS: Six hundred fifty-seven (48%) had successful induction. Parity (odds ratio [OR] 2.5, 95% CI 2.0-2.9, P <.0001), initial cervical dilatation (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.6-2.3, P <.0001), Bishop score (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3, 1.8, P <.0001), and gestational age at entry (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5, P =.002) were significant at the.05 level for predicting successful induction. A multivariate stepwise logistic regression was then performed to evaluate each of these as independent predictors. Parity (OR 2.4, 95% CI 2.0-3.0, P <.0001), initial cervical dilatation (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2.1, P <.0001), and estimated gestational age (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.6, P =.003) are significant independent predictors for successful induction, but initial Bishop score is not significant (P =.19) after adjustment for other significant predicting factors. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical characteristics of parity, initial cervical dilatation, and gestational age at entry are predictors of the likelihood of success of cervical ripening and labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol administration.     

Prospective randomized clinical trial of inpatient cervical ripening with stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening before induction of labor. STUDY DESIGN: Two hundred and four women between 32 to 42 weeks of gestation with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 6) and an indication for labor induction were randomized to receive oral or vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours up to 4 doses. The oral misoprostol group received 50 microg initially followed by 100 microg in each subsequent dose. The vaginal group received 25 microg in each dose. The primary outcome was the interval from first misoprostol dose to delivery. Patient satisfaction and side effects were assessed by surveys completed after delivery. RESULTS: Ninety-three (45.6%) women received oral misoprostol; 111 (54.4%) received vaginal misoprostol. There was no difference in the average interval from the first dose of misoprostol to delivery in the oral (21.1 + 7.9 hrs) and vaginal (21.5 + 11.0 hrs, P = NS) misoprostol groups. The incidence of hyperstimulation in the oral group was 2.2% vs 5.4% in the vaginal group, P = NS. Eighteen patients in the oral group (19.4%) and 36 (32.4%) in the vaginal group underwent cesarean section (P < .05). This difference was attributed to better tolerance of more doses of misoprostol by the women in the oral group. There was no difference in side effects (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, shivering) between groups. Fourteen percent of women in the vaginal group versus 7.5% in the oral group were dissatisfied with the use of misoprostol (P = NS). CONCLUSION: Stepwise oral misoprostol (50 microg followed by 100 microg) appears to be as effective as vaginal misoprostol (25 microg) for cervical ripening with a low incidence of hyperstimulation, no increase in side effects, a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is associated with a lower cesarean section rate.     

A prospective randomized study comparing misoprostol and oxytocin for premature rupture of membranes at term.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with premature rupture of membrane (PROM) at term. METHODS: Ninety-seven women with PROM at term were assigned randomly to receive intravaginal misoprostol or oxytocin. The primary outcome measure was the induction-delivery interval. Secondary outcomes included the number of women who delivered vaginally within 12 hours of the start of the induction in the two groups, the cesarean, hyperstimulation, and failed induction rates, the mode of delivery, and the neonatal outcome. RESULTS: Forty-eight women were assigned to intravaginal misoprostol and 49 to oxytocin administration. The mean interval from induction to delivery was 10.61 +/- 2.45 hours in the misoprostol group and 11.57 +/- 1.91 hours in the oxytocin group (p = 0.063). The rates of vaginal delivery were 83.3% and 87.7% and cesarean delivery were 16.7% and 8.2% in the misoprostol and oxytocin groups, respectively. Neonatal outcomes were not significantly different. Of the cases, 8.3% in the misoprostol group and 8.2% in the oxytocin group revealed uterine contraction abnormalities. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that, intravaginally, misoprostol results in a similar interval from induction of labor to delivery when compared to oxytocin.     

A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction

Objective: Our purpose was to compare the effect of vaginal administration of misoprostol (Cytotec) with that of dinoprostone (Cervidil) on cervical ripening and labor induction. Study design: Two hundred patients with indications for induction of labor and unfavorable cervical examinations were randomly assigned to receive vaginally administered misoprostol (prostaglandin E₁) or the dinoprostone (prostaglandin E₂) vaginal insert. Twenty-five microgram tablets of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every 4 hours for a maximum of six doses. Additional misoprostol was not given after either spontaneous rupture of membranes, adequate cervical ripening (Bishop score of ≥8 or cervical dilatation of ≥3 cm), or beginning of active labor. The vaginal insert, Cervidil, containing 10 mg of dinoprostone in a timed-release preparation was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix for a maximum period of 24 hours. The vaginal insert was removed for spontaneous rupture of membranes, entry into active labor, adequate cervical ripening, or abnormality of uterine contractile pattern or fetal cardiac activity. Results: Of the 200 patients enrolled, 99 were randomized to misoprostol and 101 to dinoprostone. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was 1 hour shorter in the misoprostol group (1296.7 ± 722.1 minutes) than in the dinoprostone group (1360.0 ± 792.0 minutes), but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.97). Oxytocin augmentation of labor was used in 50 (50.5%) misoprostol-treated patients and 43 (43.5%) dinoprostone-treated patients (relative risk 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.51, p = 0.35). There were no significant differences between routes of delivery with misoprostol or dinoprostone. Overall, 38 patients (19.3%) had cesarean deliveries. There was a significantly lower prevalence of tachysystole (six or more uterine contractions in a 10-minute window for two consecutive 10-minute periods) in the misoprostol group (7.1%) than in the dinoprostone group (18.4%) (relative risk 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.89, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in frequency of uterine hyperstimulation or hypertonus. Abnormal fetal heart rate tracings were found in 23 (23.2%) of misoprostol-treated patients and 35 (35.7%) of dinoprostone-treated patients (relative risk 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.01, p = 0.0546). No significant differences were found in meconium passage, 1- or 5-minute Apgar scores <7, neonatal resuscitations, or admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Vaginally administered misoprostol is as effective as dinoprostone for cervical ripening and the induction of labor. Mean time intervals to delivery, need for oxytocin augmentation, and routes of delivery were similar between the two groups. Incidence of uterine tachysystole with misoprostol every 4 hours was significantly less than with dinoprostone.