Comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of oral with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term. METHODS: One hundred and fifty-three pregnant women at term with indications for induction of labor and Bishop score < or = 6 were randomly assigned to receive misoprostol either 100 microg orally or 50 microg vaginally every 6 h for 48 h. Repeated doses were given until Bishop score > or = 8 was achieved or spontaneous rupture of membranes occurred. Those who were not in labor after 48 h had labor induced with amniotomy and oxytocin. The main outcome measure was induction to delivery time. RESULTS: The median induction to vaginal delivery time in the oral group (14.3 h) was not significantly different from that of the vaginal group (15.8 h). The median number of doses was also not significantly different in the oral group compared with the vaginal group. There was a significant higher incidence of uterine tachysystole in the vaginal group compared to the oral group (17.1% vs 5.3%, P = 0.032). There was no hyperstimulation in either group. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to oxytocin augmentation, cesarean section rate, analgesic requirement, and neonatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Oral administration of 100 microg misoprostol has similar efficacy to intravaginal administration of 50 microg misoprostol for labor induction with less frequent abnormal uterine contractility. 100 microg of misoprostol orally can be used as an alternative to the vaginal route for labor induction.     

A comparison of 100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours and 6 hours for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of 100 microg oral misoprostol for induction of labor between the regimen of 3 hour and 6 hour interval administration. METHODS: Singleton pregnancies indicated for induction of labor between 34 and 42 weeks of gestation in the condition of unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 4) and no contraindication for prostaglandins therapy were recruited into the study. All pregnant women were randomly assigned to receive 100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours or 6 hours until the cervix was favorable for amniotomy, spontaneous rupture of membranes or active labor occurred. RESULTS: The mean time interval from induction to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the 3 hour interval group, compared with the 6 hour interval group (13.82 +/- 6.98h and 17.66 +/- 7.48h, P = 0.0019). There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to mode of delivery, analgesic requirement, maternal complication and neonatal outcome. CONCLUSIONS: 100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours is more effective for labor induction than every 6 hours but there was no difference in mode of delivery, analgesic requirement, maternal complications and neonatal outcome. A dose of 100 microg misoprostol orally every 3 hours seems to be the optimum regimen and the new option for labor induction. However, further study should be performed.     

Labor induction post-term with 25 micrograms vs. 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of 25 microg vs. 50 microg of intravaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction beyond 41 weeks' gestation. METHODS: The study population consisted of 120 women not in active labor with a gestational age >41 weeks, singleton pregnancy with vertex presentation, reactive fetal heart rate tracing, amniotic fluid index >/=5, and Bishop score <5. Women were randomized to receive either 25 microg (n=60) or 50 microg (n=60) of intravaginal misoprostol. The dose was repeated every 4 h (maximum number of doses limited to six) until the patient exhibited three contractions in 10 min. The main outcome measure was the induction-vaginal delivery interval. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the induction-vaginal delivery interval (685+/-201 min in the 25 microg group vs. 627+/-177 min in the 50 microg group, P=0.09). The proportion of women delivering vaginally with one dose of vaginal misoprostol was significantly greater in the 50 microg group (0/49 vs. 41/47, P<0.001). There were no differences in the rates of cesarean and operative vaginal delivery rates, or in the incidences of tachysystole and hyperstimulation syndrome in the two treatment groups. Neonatal outcomes were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: Intravaginal administration of 25 microg of misoprostol appears to be as effective as 50 microg for cervical ripening and labor induction beyond 41 weeks' gestation.     

A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy and safety of oral (100 microg) and vaginal (50 microg) misoprostol for labor induction. STUDY DESIGN: Ninety-nine patients with indications for labor induction randomly received 100 microg oral misoprostol every 4 h or 50 microg vaginal misoprostol every 4 h, using maximum six doses. Mean induction to delivery interval, mode of delivery, rates of tachysystole, hypertonus and hyperstimulation syndrome, oxytocin use, number of doses used, failed induction rate and neonatal outcomes were compared for the two groups. RESULTS: Mean dose of misoprostol used for oral and vaginal misoprostol groups were 2.17+/-1.35 and 1.91+/-0.94, respectively (p=0.65). There were two failed inductions in the oral (4%) and one failed induction (2.5%) in the vaginal group after a total of six doses of misoprostol (p=0.58). There was no significant difference for the mean induction to delivery interval, to the beginning of active phase interval, active phase duration, second stage duration and the number of women who received oxytocin for induction or augmentation between the two groups (p>0.05). There were also no significant differences for intrapartum complications and neonatal outcomes between the oral and vaginal misoprostol groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that, in a closely supervised hospital setting with adequate monitoring, 100 microg oral misoprostol has the potential to induce labor as safely and effectively as its 50 microg vaginal analogue. As oral use of the drug is easier for both the patient and the doctor, oral misoprostol will probably be more preferable than the vaginal route.     

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.     

Induction of labor in great grandmultipara with misoprostol

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and complications of intravaginal misoprostol application with oxytocin infusion for induction of labor in great grandmultiparous pregnancies with a Bishop score of <6. STUDY DESIGN: Sixty-four great grandmultiparous (delivering the tenth, or greater, infant) pregnant patients with a Bishop score of <6 were randomized in two groups with 32 patients receiving 50 microg intravaginal misoprostol four times with 4h intervals, and 32 patients receiving oxytocin infusion for induction of labor starting from 2 mIU/min, increasing it every 30 min with 2 mIU/min increments up to maximum of 40 mIU/min. The time from induction to delivery, the route of delivery, fetal outcome and maternal complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U-test, Chi-Square test and hypothesis test about differences for two proportions (t-test) to determine differences between the two groups. P < or = 0.05 was considered significant. RESULT: The mean time from induction to delivery was 9.91+/-4.30 and 10.88+/-4.72 h in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups. The rate of vaginal delivery was 84.4 and 87.5% in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.72). The rates of placental abruption and postpartum hemorrhage were similar in both groups and no case of uterine rupture occurred. The 1 and 5 min mean Apgar scores were 6.91+/-1.57-8.88+/-1.39 and 7.22+/-1.24-9.06+/-0.84 in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group with no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.38 and 0.51). No case of asphyxia was present. The rate of admission to neonatal intensive care unit was higher in the misoprostol administered group, but the difference was not significant. CONCLUSION: Intravaginal misoprostol is an alternative method to oxytocin in induction of labor in great grandmultiparous pregnant women with low Bishop scores, as it is effective, cheap and easy to use. Safety about rare complications and neonatal morbidity needs clarifications with further studies.     

Induction of labor with misoprostol in pregnancies with advanced maternal age

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the efficacy and complications of intravaginal misoprostol application with oxytocin infusion for induction of labor in advanced aged pregnancies with a Bishop score of < 6. STUDY DESIGN: A hundred advanced aged (> or = 35 years) pregnant patients with a Bishop score of < 6 were randomized into two groups. The first group (50 patients) received 50 microg intravaginal misoprostol four times with 4 h intervals and the second group received oxytocin infusion for induction of labor starting from 2 mIU/min and was increased every 30 min with 2 mIU/min increments up to a maximum of 40 mIU/min. The time from induction to delivery, the route of delivery, fetal outcome, and maternal complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U, Chi-squared and t tests to determine differences between the two groups. A p value < or = 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Misoprostol was superior for induction of labor in advanced aged pregnancies with Bishop score of < 6, as the mean time from induction to delivery was 9.61 +/- 4.12 h and 11.46 +/- 4.86 h in the misoprostol and oxytocin groups respectively, with a significant difference between the groups (p = 0.04). The rate of vaginal delivery was higher in the misoprostol group (84.0%) than in the oxytocin group (80.0%), but the difference did not reach significance (p = 0.60). The rates of placental abruption and postpartum hemorrhage were similar in both groups and no cases of uterine rupture occurred. The 1- and 5-min mean Apgar scores were 6.98 +/- 1.17 to 9.08 +/- 0.99 and 6.88 +/- 1.81 to 9.00 +/- 1.35 in the misoprostol and oxytocin groups respectively, with no significant differences between the groups (p = 0.74, p = 0.83). No cases of asphyxia were present. The rate of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: Intravaginal misoprostol seems to be an alternative method to oxytocin in the induction of labor in advanced aged pregnant women with low Bishop scores, as it is efficacious, cheap, and easy to use. But large studies are necessary to clarify safety with regard to the rare complications such as uterine rupture.     

Intravaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labor.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of 100 microg of intravaginal misoprostol with intracervical Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labor. METHOD: One hundred women being induced in the Lagos University Teaching Hospital, Nigeria, were randomized to receive a single 100 microg dose of misoprostol intravaginally or intracervical insertion of Foley catheter. Data analyses were by the Student's t-test and chi-square test. RESULT: Misoprostol was more effective in terms of induction to delivery interval (11.84+/-5.43 versus 20.03+/-4.68 h, P<0.05), change in Bishop score, and number delivered within 24 h, in patients with a one-time successful induction. Uterine hyperactivity and rupture were more frequent in the misoprostol group. CONCLUSION: A single 100 microg dose of intravaginal misoprostol is more efficacious than intracervical insertion of Foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Further studies using lower doses are needed to determine the safest dose.     

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.     

A randomized trial of misoprostol versus extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion with oxytocin for induction of labor

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare the efficacy and safety of misoprostol and extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion with oxytocin for induction of labor.Study Design: This randomized trial compared two methods of labor induction in women requiring cervical ripening. One hundred twenty-three women undergoing labor induction with a Bishop score < or =5 were randomly selected to receive either misoprostol, 50 microg intravaginally every 4 hours, or extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion. The primary outcome variable was the time interval from induction to vaginal delivery. RESULTS: Sixty-one women received extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion and 62 women received misoprostol. The mean time interval from the start of induction to vaginal delivery was 15.0 +/- 5.0 hours and 16.5 +/- 7.2 hours for the extra-amniotic infusion and misoprostol groups, respectively (P, not significant). The cesarean delivery rate was not significantly different between the 2 groups (32.8% for the extra-amniotic infusion group; 19.4% for the misoprostol group). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both methods of induction are equally efficacious and result in similar maternal and neonatal outcomes.     

Predictors of successful labor induction with oral or vaginal misoprostol.

OBJECTIVE: To identify independent predictors of successful labor induction with oral or vaginal misoprostol. METHODS: Women enrolled in four previous randomized trials involving oral or vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction were included in the present cohort study, with dosing of 25-50 microg every 4 to 6 h vaginally (n = 574) or 50 microg every 4 h orally (n = 207). Multiple logistic regression was performed to identify factors independently associated with successful labor induction -- defined as vaginal delivery within 12 h, vaginal delivery within 24 h and spontaneous vaginal delivery. Predictors of Cesarean birth and the need for only one dose of misoprostol were also identified. Variables included in the models were maternal age, weight, height, parity, gravidity, membrane status, route of misoprostol, gestational age, birth weight, and Bishop score and its individual components. RESULTS: Maternal age, height, weight, parity, birth weight, dilatation, effacement and cervical station were associated with vaginal delivery within 24 h of induction. Maternal age, height, weight, nulliparity, birth weight and route of misoprostol were associated with Cesarean birth, with oral misoprostol being associated with a lower rate of Cesarean birth. The need for only one dose of misoprostol was predicted by maternal height, weight, parity, gestational age, Bishop score and route of misoprostol. CONCLUSION: Characteristics of the woman (height, weight, parity), the fetus (birth weight) and some of the individual components of the Bishop score, were associated with successful labor induction, with oral misoprostol being associated with a lower rate of Cesarean birth.     

Induction of labor in toxemia with misoprostol

BACKGROUND: To compare the efficacy and complications of intravaginal misoprostol application with oxytocin infusion for induction of labor in toxemia of pregnancy with a modified Bishop score of < or =4. METHODS: A hundred preeclamptic women with a modified Bishop score of < or =4 were randomized into two groups of 50 patients one group receiving 50 microg intravaginal misoprostol 4 times at 4 hour intervals, the second group receiving oxytocin infusion for induction of labor starting from 1 mIU/per minute, increasing it every 30 minutes with 2 mIU/per minute increments up to maximum of 30 mIU/per minute. Modified Bishop scores 12 hours after induction, the time from induction to delivery, the route of delivery, fetal outcome and maternal complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann Whitney-U, Chi-Square and hypothesis tests about differences for two proportions (t test) to determine differences between the two groups. p< or =0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Misoprostol was significantly superior for induction of labor in toxemia of pregnancy with modified Bishop score of < or =4. After 12 hours median modified Bishop scores of misoprostol administered group and oxytocin administered group were 7 and 4 respectively. Misoprostol administered group 1 was significantly better than oxytocin administered group 2 (p=0.027). The rate of patients who were in labor after 12 hours were 94% and 80% in group 1 and 2 respectively and the difference showed significant difference (p<0.05). The median time from induction to delivery was 14 hours and 16 hours in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group respectively with significant difference between the groups (p=0.003). The rate of vaginal delivery was significantly higher in the misoprostol administered group 1 (82%) when compared with the oxytocin administered group 2 (66%) (p<0.05). The 1 and 5 minutes median Apgar scores were 5-7 and 6-7.5 in group 1 and 2, respectively with no significant differences between the groups (p=0.96, p=0.64). The rate of admission to neonatal intensive care unit was similar in both groups. The complication rates were similar in all groups and no significant detrimental effects were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Intravaginal misoprostol is an efficacious, cheap and safe method of induction of labor in toxemia of pregnancy with modified Bishop score of < or =4.     

The routine use of oxytocin after oral misoprostol for labour induction in women with an unfavourable cervix is not of benefit

BACKGROUND: Induction of labour with misoprostol is often augmented with oxytocin with the possible consequence of uterine hypercontractility. It is important to determine whether the use of oxytocin in this circumstance has benefit as well as risk. AIM: To compare two regimens for labour induction in women with an unfavourable cervix: oral misoprostol vs. oral misoprostol routinely followed by oxytocin. METHODS: A prospective randomised trial in which 200 women with an unfavourable cervix received either oral misoprostol 25 microg every 3 h (group 1, n = 100) or two such doses routinely followed by oxytocin (group 2, n = 100). Outcomes included change in Bishop score, induction delivery interval, oxytocin requirement, contraction abnormalities, mode of delivery and neonatal outcome. RESULT: The improvement in Bishop score with two misoprostol doses in all 200 women was highly significant (2.9 +/- 1.5 to 6.6 +/- 1.9, P < 0.0001). The induction delivery interval, Caesarean delivery rate, vaginal delivery rate within 24 h, contraction abnormalities and neonatal outcome were similar in both groups. Contraction abnormalities were remarkably low with either regimen (1%). Routine addition of oxytocin 3 h after the second misoprostol dose (group 2) resulted in the maximum oxytocin dose (64 mU/min) being given to more women (66% in group 2; 36% in group 1). CONCLUSION: There was no benefit of routine addition of oxytocin after two doses of misoprostol. Reduced oxytocin requirement was observed when it was added only if needed. Both regimens achieved 85-87% vaginal deliveries with low incidence of hypercontractility.     

Cervical ripening with oral misoprostol at term.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of 200 microg single dose oral misoprostol as a cervical priming agent at term. METHODS: In this double-blind randomized trial, 156 pregnant women requiring induction of labor with gestational age of 37-42 weeks and Bishop score < or =5, were randomized to receive either 200 microg of misoprostol or a placebo, orally. Labor was induced with intravenous oxytocin infusion 12 h after oral medication if the patient did not go into labor. The primary outcome was the change in the Bishop score 12 h after oral medication. The secondary outcomes were the timings starting from the drug administration to the onset of uterine activity, interval between oral medication and delivery, oxytocin need for induction, mode of delivery, frequency of side effects, and neonatal and maternal outcome. The chi-square or Fisher exact test, Student's t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for analysis of the data. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in maternal characteristics or indications of induction. The Bishop score 12 h after oral medication significantly improved in the misoprostol group compared with the control group [55 (70%)>8 vs. 4 (5%)>8; P<0.001]. The induction rate was significantly reduced in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). The interval between oral medication and the onset of uterine activity was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). The interval between oral medication and delivery was also significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). The cesarean delivery rate was significantly lower in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). There were no differences between the groups with respect to the incidence of tachysystole, hyperstimulation, adverse neonatal or maternal outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Oral administration of 200 microg single dose of misoprostol is an effective agent not only for cervical priming but also for induction of labor at term. Furthermore, it reduces the rate of cesarean deliveries.     

A comparison of orally administered misoprostol with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to compare orally administered with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Two hundred twenty subjects with medical or obstetric indications for labor induction and undilated, uneffaced cervices were randomly assigned to receive orally administered or vaginally administered misoprostol. Fifty micrograms of oral misoprostol or 25 microgram of vaginal misoprostol was given every 4 hours. If cervical ripening (Bishop score of >/=8 or cervical dilatation of >/=3) or active labor did not occur, repeated doses were given to a maximum of 6 doses or 24 hours. Thereafter, oxytocin was administered intravenously by a standardized incremental infusion protocol to a maximum of 22 mU/min. RESULTS: Of the 220 subjects evaluated, 110 received orally administered misoprostol and 110 received vaginally administered misoprostol. Fewer subjects who received the oral preparation (34/110, 30.9%) were delivered vaginally within 24 hours of initiation of induction, in comparison with those who received the vaginal preparation (52/110, 47.3%) (P =.01). The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was nearly 6 hours longer in the oral treatment group (mean and SD 1737.9 +/- 845.7 minutes) than in the vaginal treatment group (mean and SD 1393.2 +/- 767.9) (P =.005, log-transformed data). Orally treated patients required significantly more doses than vaginally treated patients (orally administered doses: mean and SD 3.3 +/- 1.7; vaginally administered doses: mean and SD 2.3 +/- 1.2) (P <.0001). Oxytocin administration was necessary in 83 (75.4%) of 110 orally treated subjects and in 65 (59.1%) of 110 vaginally treated subjects (P =.01, relative risk 1. 28, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.54). Vaginal delivery occurred in 95 (86.4%) orally treated subjects and in 85 (77.3%) vaginally treated subjects (P =.08, relative risk 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.99-1.27), with the remainder undergoing cesarean delivery. There was no difference in the incidence of uterine contractile abnormalities (tachysystole, hypertonus, or hyperstimulation), intrapartum complications, or neonatal outcomes between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Oral administration of 50-microgram doses of misoprostol appears less effective than vaginal administration of 25-microgram doses of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Further investigation is needed to determine whether orally administered misoprostol should be used for cervical ripening and labor induction.     

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.     

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.     

Intracervical misoprostol as an effective method of labor induction at term.

OBJECTS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of intracervical misoprostol for the induction of labor at term. METHODS: Eighty-nine term pregnancies requiring induction of labor were treated intracervically with 50 microg of misoprostol. The dose was repeated every 4 h until adequate uterine contraction and cervical dilatation were achieved. Status of cervical ripening, uterine contraction, cervical dilatation, labor course and side effects were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Among the 89 patients, 58 had an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 4) and 31 had a favorable cervix (Bishop score > 4). Labor was successfully induced in all cases, most (93.3%) of which required a single dose of misoprostol. Seventy-two patients (81%) proceeded to spontaneous vaginal delivery, and 61 (85%) deliveries were achieved within 12 h. The other 17 cases received cesarean delivery with indications of fetopelvic disproportion (six cases), failure of induction (seven cases) and acute fetal distress (four cases). The mean duration from induction to regular uterine contraction and to delivery was 483+/-537 min and 79.2+/-38.2 min, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups with differing status of cervical ripening. Complications of uterine contraction, including tachysystole (15 cases), hypertonus (one case) and hyperstimulation (10 cases) were more common in the group of unfavorable cervix (45%) than that of favorable cervix (23%) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In addition to the oral and intravaginal routes of administration, intracervical misoprostol at a single dose of 50 microg appears to be an effective method for induction of labor at term, but caution should be taken with cases with unfavorable cervix.     

A randomized comparison of transcervical Foley catheter to intravaginal misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol tablets with transcervical Foley catheter for preinduction cervical ripening. METHODS: Pregnant women who presented for induction of labor with unfavorable cervices (Bishop score less than 6) were assigned randomly to intravaginal misoprostol (50 microg tablet every 4 hours for a maximum of six doses) or 30-mL Foley catheter placed transcervically with maintenance of traction. RESULTS: Among 111 women, 53 were allocated to misoprostol and 58 to Foley bulb. Contractile abnormalities were more frequent in the misoprostol group (20.4%) than the Foley group (0%) (P <.001). No statistically significant differences were noted between groups in change in Bishop score, preinduction cervical ripening times, and total induction times. There were no statistically significant differences in mode of delivery or adverse neonatal outcomes. Uterine rupture occurred in one woman with two previous cesarean deliveries in the misoprostol group. CONCLUSION: Intravaginal misoprostol and transcervical Foley catheter are equivalent for cervical ripening. Uterine contractile abnormalities and meconium passage are more common with misoprostol.     

Six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction

AIM: Prospective clinical trials were conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of 6-hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for induction of labor. METHODS: A total of 120 pregnant women requiring induction of labor were recruited. Cases were randomized to receive either 50 microg vaginal misoprostol 6 hourly (group 1, n = 60) or 0.5 mg intracervical dinoprostone 6 hourly (group II, n = 60). Outcome measures, such as change in Bishop's score, need of oxytocin, induction delivery interval; complications like tachysystoly, hyperstimulation, abnormal fetal heart rate, and meconium passage were compared between two groups. Statistical analysis was performed by Wilcoxan's Rank sum and Student's t-test. RESULTS: Bishop score rise, after 6 h of initiation of therapy was significantly higher in the misoprostol group than dinoprostone, 2.98 +/- 2.57 versus 2.05 +/- 1.83 (P = 0.04). The need of oxytocin augmentation was reduced in misoprostol versus dinoprostone group, 16.6% versus 78.3% (P = <0.001). Induction delivery interval was shorter in misoprostol; 12.8 +/- 6.4 h versus 18.53 +/- 8.5 h in dinoprostone group (P = <0.01). One case (1.6%) in misoprostol group, but none in dinoprostone had tachystole (P = 1.00). Abnormal heart rate pattern was found more in misoprostol than dinoprostone 16.6% versus 4.9% (P = 0.14) and so was the incidence of cesarean section, 26.6 versus 15%, respectively (P = 0.47). Meconium passage was the same in both groups, 10% in each group. CONCLUSION: Vaginal misoprostol 50 microg 6-hourly is safe and effective for induction of labor with lesser need of oxytocin augmentation and shorter induction delivery interval.