Vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel versus tablet in the induction of labour at term: a retrospective

Ashalatha Shetty, I. Livingston, S. Acharya, Alexander Allan Templeton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


Our aim in this retrospective analysis was to compare labour
outcomes between 145 consecutive women with unfavourable
cervices, who received prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel (1 – 2 mg)
for labour induction over a 3-month period, and 149 women
receiving a prostaglandin E2 vaginal tablet (3 mg) over the
following 3 months. Our results showed that cervical dilatation
in the gel group was significantly more than in the tablet group
at transfer to labour ward [4 cm (SD 2.5cm) versus 3.3 cm (SD
2 cm), mean difference – 0.7, 95% CI – 1.2 to – 0.2, P=0.01),
with fewer women requiring oxytocin augmentation, but this
was not statistically significant (41.4% versus 50%, RR 0.8, 95%
CI 0.7 – 1.1). There were no significant differences in the mode
of delivery in the number delivering vaginally within 24 hours of
the induction (60.4% in the gel group versus 56.2% in the tablet
group, RR1.1, 95% CI 0.9 – 1.4), in the number of doses of
PGE2 administered, or in the neonatal outcomes between the
two groups. In conclusion, there were no significant differences
in labour or neonatal outcomes between prostaglandin E2 gel or
tablet use in the induction of labour in this retrospective
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)243-246
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 2004


Dive into the research topics of 'Vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel versus tablet in the induction of labour at term: a retrospective'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this