Oral misoprostol (100 mu g) versus vaginal misoprostol (25 mu g) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison

A Shetty, I Livingstone, S Acharya, P Rice, P Danielian, A Templeton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol (25 mug) to oral misoprostol (100 mug) in labor induction at term.

Methods. One hundred and one women at term, with indications for labor induction and cervical Bishop's scores of less than 8, were randomly assigned to receive 100 mug of oral misoprostol or 25 mug vaginal misoprostol after random allocation. This could be repeated every 4 h to a maximum of five doses. The number delivering vaginally within 24 h of the induction was the main outcome measure.

Results. Of those who delivered vaginally (74.5% in the oral group vs. 72% in the vaginal group), significantly fewer women delivered within 24 h of induction in the oral group (42.1% vs. 72.2%, RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9), with more women receiving more than one dose (45.7% vs. 16.7%, RR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.0). More women in the oral group received oxytocin (68.6% vs. 44%, RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), and the induction to delivery interval was shorter in the vaginal group, although this was not statistically significant [28.9 h (SD 20.2) vs. 20.6 h (SD 16.1), mean difference-8.3 h, 95% CI-16.8 to 0.2]. There were no differences in the modes of delivery, uterine hyperstimulation rates or in the neonatal outcomes.

Conclusion. Vaginal misoprostol in its currently recommended dose of 25 mug seems to be more efficacious than the 100 mug oral dose.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1103-1106
Number of pages4
JournalActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
Volume82
Publication statusPublished - 2003

Keywords

  • oral misoprostol
  • vaginal misoprostol
  • labor induction at term
  • TRIAL

Cite this

Oral misoprostol (100 mu g) versus vaginal misoprostol (25 mu g) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison. / Shetty, A ; Livingstone, I ; Acharya, S ; Rice, P ; Danielian, P ; Templeton, A .

In: Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, Vol. 82, 2003, p. 1103-1106.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c169fe433263465796e06f86781436cb,
title = "Oral misoprostol (100 mu g) versus vaginal misoprostol (25 mu g) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison",
abstract = "Objective. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol (25 mug) to oral misoprostol (100 mug) in labor induction at term.Methods. One hundred and one women at term, with indications for labor induction and cervical Bishop's scores of less than 8, were randomly assigned to receive 100 mug of oral misoprostol or 25 mug vaginal misoprostol after random allocation. This could be repeated every 4 h to a maximum of five doses. The number delivering vaginally within 24 h of the induction was the main outcome measure.Results. Of those who delivered vaginally (74.5{\%} in the oral group vs. 72{\%} in the vaginal group), significantly fewer women delivered within 24 h of induction in the oral group (42.1{\%} vs. 72.2{\%}, RR 0.6, 95{\%} CI 0.4-0.9), with more women receiving more than one dose (45.7{\%} vs. 16.7{\%}, RR 2.7, 95{\%} CI 1.2-6.0). More women in the oral group received oxytocin (68.6{\%} vs. 44{\%}, RR 1.6, 95{\%} CI 1.1-2.2), and the induction to delivery interval was shorter in the vaginal group, although this was not statistically significant [28.9 h (SD 20.2) vs. 20.6 h (SD 16.1), mean difference-8.3 h, 95{\%} CI-16.8 to 0.2]. There were no differences in the modes of delivery, uterine hyperstimulation rates or in the neonatal outcomes.Conclusion. Vaginal misoprostol in its currently recommended dose of 25 mug seems to be more efficacious than the 100 mug oral dose.",
keywords = "oral misoprostol, vaginal misoprostol, labor induction at term, TRIAL",
author = "A Shetty and I Livingstone and S Acharya and P Rice and P Danielian and A Templeton",
year = "2003",
language = "English",
volume = "82",
pages = "1103--1106",
journal = "Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica",
issn = "0001-6349",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Oral misoprostol (100 mu g) versus vaginal misoprostol (25 mu g) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison

AU - Shetty, A

AU - Livingstone, I

AU - Acharya, S

AU - Rice, P

AU - Danielian, P

AU - Templeton, A

PY - 2003

Y1 - 2003

N2 - Objective. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol (25 mug) to oral misoprostol (100 mug) in labor induction at term.Methods. One hundred and one women at term, with indications for labor induction and cervical Bishop's scores of less than 8, were randomly assigned to receive 100 mug of oral misoprostol or 25 mug vaginal misoprostol after random allocation. This could be repeated every 4 h to a maximum of five doses. The number delivering vaginally within 24 h of the induction was the main outcome measure.Results. Of those who delivered vaginally (74.5% in the oral group vs. 72% in the vaginal group), significantly fewer women delivered within 24 h of induction in the oral group (42.1% vs. 72.2%, RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9), with more women receiving more than one dose (45.7% vs. 16.7%, RR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.0). More women in the oral group received oxytocin (68.6% vs. 44%, RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), and the induction to delivery interval was shorter in the vaginal group, although this was not statistically significant [28.9 h (SD 20.2) vs. 20.6 h (SD 16.1), mean difference-8.3 h, 95% CI-16.8 to 0.2]. There were no differences in the modes of delivery, uterine hyperstimulation rates or in the neonatal outcomes.Conclusion. Vaginal misoprostol in its currently recommended dose of 25 mug seems to be more efficacious than the 100 mug oral dose.

AB - Objective. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol (25 mug) to oral misoprostol (100 mug) in labor induction at term.Methods. One hundred and one women at term, with indications for labor induction and cervical Bishop's scores of less than 8, were randomly assigned to receive 100 mug of oral misoprostol or 25 mug vaginal misoprostol after random allocation. This could be repeated every 4 h to a maximum of five doses. The number delivering vaginally within 24 h of the induction was the main outcome measure.Results. Of those who delivered vaginally (74.5% in the oral group vs. 72% in the vaginal group), significantly fewer women delivered within 24 h of induction in the oral group (42.1% vs. 72.2%, RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4-0.9), with more women receiving more than one dose (45.7% vs. 16.7%, RR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6.0). More women in the oral group received oxytocin (68.6% vs. 44%, RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2), and the induction to delivery interval was shorter in the vaginal group, although this was not statistically significant [28.9 h (SD 20.2) vs. 20.6 h (SD 16.1), mean difference-8.3 h, 95% CI-16.8 to 0.2]. There were no differences in the modes of delivery, uterine hyperstimulation rates or in the neonatal outcomes.Conclusion. Vaginal misoprostol in its currently recommended dose of 25 mug seems to be more efficacious than the 100 mug oral dose.

KW - oral misoprostol

KW - vaginal misoprostol

KW - labor induction at term

KW - TRIAL

M3 - Article

VL - 82

SP - 1103

EP - 1106

JO - Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

JF - Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

SN - 0001-6349

ER -