Literature DB >> 9052591

A randomized trial of misoprostol and oxytocin for induction of labor: safety and efficacy.

R L Kramer1, G J Gilson, D S Morrison, D Martin, J L Gonzales, C R Qualls.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of misoprostol and oxytocin for induction of labor.
METHODS: One hundred thirty women requiring induction of labor were randomized to receive either intravenous oxytocin or 100 micrograms misoprostol, administered intravaginally every 4 hours until labor was established.
RESULTS: Compared with women receiving oxytocin, a greater percentage of women in the misoprostol group had Bishop scores of 3 or less (58 versus 38%, P < .05). Nonetheless, the median induction-to-delivery interval was significantly shorter (585 versus 885 minutes, P < .001) in the misoprostol group. Women in the misoprostol group were more likely to deliver vaginally within 24 hours of the start of induction (77 versus 55%, P < .002). Epidural analgesia was used more frequently in women receiving oxytocin than in those receiving misoprostol (73 versus 50%, P = .025). The total percentage of cesarean deliveries was not significantly different, although the percentage of cesarean deliveries for dystocia was lower in the misoprostol group (8 versus 21%, P = .02). Uterine tachysystole was significantly more common (70 versus 11%, P < .001) and hospital charges significantly less with misoprostol.
CONCLUSION: Compared with oxytocin for labor induction, misoprostol results in a shorter induction-to-delivery interval, a reduction in the rate of cesarean delivery for dystocia, and a decreased use of epidural analgesia. Uterine tachysystole is significantly more common with the use of misoprostol.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9052591     DOI: 10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00363-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  7 in total

Review 1.  Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour.

Authors:  G Justus Hofmeyr; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Cynthia Pileggi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-10-06

Review 2.  Chemotherapeutic induction of labour. A rational approach.

Authors:  E M Xenakis; J M Piper
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Induction of Labor in Post-Term Nulliparous and Parous Women - Potential Advantages of Misoprostol over Dinoprostone.

Authors:  P Tsikouras; Z Koukouli; B Manav; M Soilemetzidis; A Liberis; R Csorba; G Trypsianis; G Galazios
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.915

Review 4.  A benefit-risk assessment of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction.

Authors:  Deborah A Wing
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 5.606

5.  Outcome of misoprostol and oxytocin in induction of labour.

Authors:  Trishna Acharya; Ramesh Devkota; Bimbishar Bhattarai; Radha Acharya
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2017-03-23

6.  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

7.  Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Nulliparous Participants Undergoing Labor Induction by Cervical Ripening Method.

Authors:  Maria Andrikopoulou; Elisa T Bushman; Madeline M Rice; William A Grobman; Uma M Reddy; Robert M Silver; Yasser Y El-Sayed; Dwight J Rouse; George R Saade; John M Thorp; Suneet P Chauhan; Maged M Costantine; Edward K Chien; Brian M Casey; Sindhu K Srinivas; Geeta K Swamy; Hyagriv N Simhan
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 1.862

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.