Literature DB >> 26995147

Initial clinical experience with a misoprostol vaginal insert in comparison with a dinoprostone insert for inducing labor.

Richard Bernhard Mayer1, Peter Oppelt2, Omar Shebl2, Joachim Pömer2, Christina Allerstorfer2, Christoph Weiss2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Only one phase III trial has been published to date on the efficacy and safety of misoprostol vaginal inserts for inducing labor. The aim of this study was to compare misoprostol inserts with dinoprostone inserts. STUDY
DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study evaluated the reduction in time to vaginal delivery and delivery within 24h, in routine clinical work, in 119 labor inductions using a 200-μg misoprostol vaginal insert (Misodel(®); June-October 2014) in comparison with 124 inductions using a 10-mg dinoprostone insert (Propess(®); December 2013-April 2014).
RESULTS: Vaginal delivery within 24h occurred in 77.3% (n=92) of the misoprostol cohort and 74.2% (n=92) of the dinoprostone cohort (P=0.654). Time from insert application to vaginal delivery (min) was 761.76 (±409.44, cohort M) versus 805.17 (±473.00, cohort D) (P=0.817). Cesarean delivery was performed in 10.1% (n=12) versus 10.5% (n=13) in the misoprostol and dinoprostone cohorts, respectively (P≥0.999). The modified Bishop scores were 2.0 versus 3.0 (P=0.001), mean body mass index (BMI) was 24.72 versus 23.95 (P=0.033), and fetal scalp blood testing was required in 12.6% (n=15) versus 3.2% (n=4; P=0.008). No differences were observed with regard to the rates of transfer to the neonatal unit or any type of fetal acidosis.
CONCLUSIONS: The groups thus had similar results for rates of vaginal delivery within 24h, cesarean delivery and fetal outcomes. The misoprostol group had lower modified Bishop scores, higher BMIs, and a higher rate of fetal scalp blood testing.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical ripening; Dinoprostone; Labor induction; Misoprostol; Vaginal insert

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26995147     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.03.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  7 in total

1.  [Clinical efficacy and safety of controlled-release dinoprostone insert: a multicenter retrospective study].

Authors:  Xue-Yuan Li; Yue-Wen Guo; Yan-Wen Xu; Bin Zhu; Xue-Xue Wu; Xiang Chen; Xiao-Yi Wang; Dun-Jin Chen; Hui Chen; Jian-Ping Zhang; Zhi-Jian Wang; Sheng-Li An
Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao       Date:  2017-01-20

2.  Labor induction with prostaglandin E1 versus E2: a comparison of outcomes.

Authors:  Hector Mendez-Figueroa; Matthew J Bicocca; Megha Gupta; Stephen M Wagner; Suneet P Chauhan
Journal:  J Perinatol       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 2.521

3.  [Subgroup identification based on the Logistic model].

Authors:  Yanhong Zhang; Xueyuan Li; Zhijian Wang; Shengli An
Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao       Date:  2018-12-30

4.  A comparison of misoprostol vaginal insert and misoprostol vaginal tablets for induction of labor in nulliparous women: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kjersti Engen Marsdal; Ingvil Krarup Sørbye; Lise C Gaudernack; Mirjam Lukasse
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 3.007

5.  Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study.

Authors:  Daniele Bolla; Saskia Vanessa Weissleder; Anda-Petronela Radan; Maria Luisa Gasparri; Luigi Raio; Martin Müller; Daniel Surbek
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Clinical Insights for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction Using Prostaglandins.

Authors:  Stephanie Pierce; Ronan Bakker; Dean A Myers; Rodney K Edwards
Journal:  AJP Rep       Date:  2018-10-29

7.  Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study.

Authors:  Markus Schmidt; Maria Neophytou; Olaf Hars; Julia Freudenberg; Maritta Kühnert
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 2.344

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.