Literature DB >> 18850516

A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.

James B Hill1, Brad D Thigpen, James A Bofill, Everett Magann, Lisa E Moore, James N Martin.   

Abstract

We compared labor induced by vaginal misoprostol versus a supracervical Foley catheter and oral misoprostol. Singleton pregnancies at > or = 24 weeks' gestation were randomized to either an initial 25-microg dose of intravaginal misoprostol, followed by 50-microg intravaginal doses at 3- to 6-hour intervals, or a supracervical Foley balloon and 100 microg of oral misoprostol at 4- to 6-hour intervals. Primary outcome was time from induction to delivery. One hundred twenty-six women were randomized to vaginal misoprostol alone (group I) and 106 women to Foley and oral misoprostol (group II). The groups were similar in age, weight, gestational age, parity, indication for induction of labor, and oxytocin use. Cesarean delivery rates at 37% and cesarean indications were similar ( P = 0.25). The time from induction to delivery in group II (12.9 hours) was significantly shorter than that in group I (17.8 hours, P < 0.001). Uterine tachysystole occurred less often in the vaginal misoprostol group (21% versus 39%, P = 0.015). Compared with vaginal misoprostol, delivery within 24 hours was significantly more likely with a Foley balloon and oral misoprostol. The use of terbutaline and peripartum outcomes were similar in the two groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18850516     DOI: 10.1055/s-0028-1091396

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Perinatol        ISSN: 0735-1631            Impact factor:   1.862


  8 in total

1.  Induction of Labour: Change of Method and its Effects.

Authors:  S Kehl; C Weiss; U Dammer; E Raabe; S Burghaus; J Heimrich; J Hackl; M Winkler; M W Beckmann; F Faschingbauer
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 2.915

2.  Mechanical and Pharmacologic Methods of Labor Induction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Lisa D Levine; Katheryne L Downes; Michal A Elovitz; Samuel Parry; Mary D Sammel; Sindhu K Srinivas
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 7.661

3.  Comparison of Vaginal and Oral Doses of Misoprostol for Labour Induction in Post-Term Pregnancies.

Authors:  Masomeh Rezaie; Fariba Farhadifar; Susan Mirza Mohammadi Sadegh; Morteza Nayebi
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-03-01

4.  Sequential Versus Concurrent Use of Vaginal Misoprostol Plus Foley Catheter for Induction of Labor: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Ibrahim Abd Elgafor El Sharkwy; Elsayed Hamdy Noureldin; Ekramy Abd Elmoneim Mohamed; Sherine Attia Shazly
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2017-11-07

Review 5.  Mechanical methods for induction of labour.

Authors:  Marieke Dt de Vaan; Mieke Lg Ten Eikelder; Marta Jozwiak; Kirsten R Palmer; Miranda Davies-Tuck; Kitty Wm Bloemenkamp; Ben Willem J Mol; Michel Boulvain
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-10-18

6.  Vaginal versus sublingual misoprostol for labor induction at term and post term: a randomized prospective study.

Authors:  Sedigheh Ayati; Fatemeh Vahidroodsari; Farnoosh Farshidi; Masoud Shahabian; Monavar Afzal Aghaee
Journal:  Iran J Pharm Res       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.696

7.  Comparison of vaginal misoprostol with foley catheter for cervical ripening and induction of labor.

Authors:  Fatemeh Vahid Roudsari; Sedigheh Ayati; Marzieh Ghasemi; Maliheh Hasanzadeh Mofrad; Mohamad Taghi Shakeri; Farnoush Farshidi; Masoud Shahabian
Journal:  Iran J Pharm Res       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.696

8.  Effect of extra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol alone on cervical ripening and induction of labor in Kenya, a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Alfred Osoti; Davies Kiprop Kibii; Tito Mario Kual Tong; Innocent Maranga
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-07-12       Impact factor: 3.007

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.