Literature DB >> 17379223

Sublingual compared with oral and vaginal misoprostol for labor induction.

E M Elhassan1, A M Nasr, I Adam.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2007        PMID： 17379223     DOI： 10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.02.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet        ISSN： 0020-7292            Impact factor:   3.561


× No keyword cloud information.
  4 in total

Review 1.  Methods of induction of labour: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ellen L Mozurkewich; Julie L Chilimigras; Deborah R Berman; Uma C Perni; Vivian C Romero; Valerie J King; Kristie L Keeton
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 3.007

Review 2.  Oral misoprostol for induction of labour.

Authors:  Zarko Alfirevic; Nasreen Aflaifel; Andrew Weeks
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-06-13

Review 3.  Buccal or sublingual misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour.

Authors:  G Muzonzini; G J Hofmeyr
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004-10-18

4.  Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour.

Authors:  Robbie S Kerr; Nimisha Kumar; Myfanwy J Williams; Anna Cuthbert; Nasreen Aflaifel; David M Haas; Andrew D Weeks
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-06-22
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.