Literature DB >> 30723912

Low-dose vaginal misoprostol vs vaginal dinoprostone insert for induction of labor beyond 41st week: A randomized trial.

Carlos De Bonrostro Torralba1, Eva Lucía Tejero Cabrejas1, Blanca Mar Envid Lázaro1, Maria Jesús Franco Royo1, Montserrat Roca Arquillué1, Jose Manuel Campillos Maza1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a low-dose protocol of vaginal misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone insert for induction of labor in women with post-term pregnancies.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: We designed a prospective, randomized, open-labeled trial with evaluators blinded to the end-point, including women of at least 41 weeks of gestational age with uncomplicated singleton pregnancies and a Bishop score <6. They were randomized into dinoprostone or misoprostol groups in a 1:1 ratio. Baseline maternal data and perinatal outcomes were recorded for statistical analysis. Successful vaginal delivery within 24 hours was the primary outcome variable. A P value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. This study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (number NTC03744364).
RESULTS: We included 198 women for analysis (99 women in each group). Vaginal birth rate within 24 hours did not differ between groups (49.5% vs 42.4%; P = 0.412). When the Bishop score was <4, dinoprostone insert showed a higher probability of vaginal delivery within 12 hours (17.8% vs 4%; P = 0.012). In the dinoprostone group, removal of the insert was more likely to be due to an adverse event (5.1% vs 14.1%; P = 0.051) and an abnormal fetal heart rate pattern during active labor (44.4% vs 58.6%; P = 0.047). Both groups were similar in neonatal outcomes including Apgar score, umbilical cord pH and neonatal intensive care unit admission.
CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose vaginal misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone insert seem to be equally effective and safe for induction of labor in pregnant women with a gestational age beyond 41 weeks.
© 2019 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cervical ripening; dinoprostone; induced labor; misoprostol; obstetric labor; pregnancy

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30723912     DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13556

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  2 in total

1.  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

2.  Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert for Induction of Labor in Women with Low-Risk Pregnancies: A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Nguyen Duy Anh; Tran Anh Duc; Nguyen-Thi Thu Ha; Duong-Thi Tra Giang; Do Tuan Dat; Phan-Thi Huyen Thuong; Nguyen Khac Toan; Nguyen Tai Duc; Nguyen Minh Duc
Journal:  Med Arch       Date:  2022-02
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.