A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term

Saima Ali; Shumaila Mubasher; Ambreen Naveed Haq

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

| Peer-Reviewed

A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term

Saima Ali, Shumaila Mubasher, Ambreen Naveed Haq

Published in Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Volume 2, Issue 6)

Received: 2 October 2014 Accepted: 9 October 2014 Published: 30 October 2014

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Our objective was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol and tablet PGE2 for induction of labor at term.Methods: In this RCT a total of 140 women at term gestation were given either misoprostol (50 mcg) or prostaglandin E2 (3 mg) for induction of labour. The study was conducted at the Gynae/Obstetrics department, PAEC Hospital Islamabad, in a period of six months. All women requiring induction, having gestational age > 37 weeks, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation, bishop score < 6 and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were included in the study. The study outcome was measurement of efficacy in terms of induction delivery interval, number of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours, mode of delivery, total doses, need for oxytocin and number of successful inductions. Results: The mean age and average gestational age was similar in the two groups of patients. In group A (51.4%) patients required two doses while in group B (32.9%) took two doses. Similarly, (60%) patients required oxytocin in group A compared to (50%) in group B. The mean delivery induction interval was 10.8 hours (650 minutes) in group A compared to 9.01 hours (541 minutes) in group B; and this difference in two means is statistically significant. In group A (18.5%) patients required emergency cesarean section while in group B (27.1%) needed cesarean section. The major indication for emergency cesarean section in group B was fetal distress. Therefore misoprostol can play a very important role in the practice of obstetrics and gynecology in resource depleted countries where other prostaglandins are expensive and storage at low temperature is a problem.

Published in	Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Volume 2, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
Page(s)	81-85
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Misoprostol, Prostaglandin E2, Term Pregnancy, Labour Induction

References

[1]	Memon A, Sikandar R. Misoprostol for induction of labour: the Hyderabad experience. J Liaqat Uni Med Health Sci 2007; 6: 56-9. [Journal]
[2]	Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Robinson JS. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour at term: Randomized controlled trial. BMJ 2006; 332: 509-13. [Journal]
[3]	Papanikolaou EG, Plachouras N, Droughia A, Andronikou S, Vlachou C, Stefos T, et al. Comparison of misoprostol and dinoprostone for elective induction of labour in nulliparous women at full term: A randomized prospective study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2004; 2: 70. [Journal]
[4]	Tenore JL. Method for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Am Fam Physician 2003; 67:2123-8. [Journal]
[5]	Laws PJ, Sullivan EA. Australia’s mother and babies 2002. Sydney: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), National Perinatal Statistics Unit (NPSU). 2004. [Report]
[6]	Tan PC, Valiapan SD, Tay PYS, Omar SZ. Concurrent oxytocin with dinoprostone pessary versus dinoprostone pessary in labour induction of nulliparous with unfavourable cervix: A randomized placebo-controlled trial. BJOG 2007; 114: 824-32. [Journal]
[7]	Gregson S, Waterstone M, Norman I, Murrels T. A randomized controlled trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal gel for inducing labour at term. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2005; 112: 438-42. [Journal]
[8]	Bartuseuicius A, Barcaite E, Krikstolaitis R, Gintautas V, Nadisauskiene R. Sublingual compared with vaginal misoprostol for labour induction at term: A randomized controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2006; 113: 1431-37. [Journal]
[9]	Weaver SP, Cook J, Nashelsky J. Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening in term pregnancy. Am Fam Physician 2006; 73: 511-2. [Journal]
[10]	Song J. Use of misoprostol in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2000; 55:503-10. [Journal]
[11]	Abbasi RM, Sirichand P, Rizvi S. Safety and efficacy of oral versus vaginal Misoprostol use for Induction of labour at term. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2008; 18: 625-9. [Journal]
[12]	Nassar AH, Awwad J, Khlil AM, Abu- Musa A, Mehio G, Usta IM. A randomized comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term. BJOG 2007; 114:1215-21. [Journal]
[13]	Kappy KA, Certulo C, Knuppel RA, Ingardia CJ, Sabre AJ, Scarab JC. Prolonged rupture of membranes at term. J Reprod Med 1982; 27:29 –33. [Journal]
[14]	Jegani N, Schulman A, Fleischer A, Mitchell J, Raudlph G. Role of the cervix in the induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1982; 59:21 –26.
[15]	Zhang J, Yancey MK, Henderson CE. U.S. national trends in labor induction, 1989–1998. J Reprod Med 2002; 47:120–4. [Journal]
[16]	Rayburn WF, Zhang J. Rising rates of labor induction: present concerns and future strategies. Obstet Gynecol 2002; 100:164–7. [Journal]
[17]	American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of Labor. ACOG Practice Bulletin. Number 10.Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1999. [Journal]
[18]	Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Induction of Labour. Guideline. No. 9. London, UK: RCOG Press, 2001. [RCOG]
[19]	Hofmeyr GJ. Induction of labour with an unfavourable cervix. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 17:777–94. [Journal]
[20]	Cammu H, Martens G, Ruyssinck G, Amy JJ. Outcome after elective labor induction in nulliparous women: a matched cohort study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186:240–4. [Journal]
[21]	Seyb ST, Berka RJ, Socol ML, Dooley SL. Risk of cesarean delivery with elective induction of labor at term in nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94:600–7. [Journal]
[22]	Luthy DA, Malmgren JA, Zingheim RW. Caesarean delivery after elective induction in nulliparous women. AJOG 2004; 15: 319 -23. [Journal]
[23]	Williams MC, Krammer J, O’Brien WF. The value of the cervical score in predicting successful outcome of labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90:784–9. [Journal]
[24]	Kelly AJ, Kanvanagh J, Thomas J. vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane database syst rev, 2003; 4: CD003101.
[25]	Bartusevicius A, Baracaite E, Nadisauskiene R. Oral, Vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005; 91: 2 – 9. [Journal]
[26]	American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Committee Opinion. Number 283, May 2003. New U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling on Cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 10:1049-50. [Journal]
[27]	Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of labour. Evidence based clinical guideline no. 9, 2001. Accessed. 30 May 2007.
[28]	Wasim T, Siddiq S. Comparison of prostaglandin E2 with misoprostol for induction of labour at term. Professional Med J 2008; 15: 344-49
[29]	Rozenberg P, Chevret S, Senat MV, Bretelle F, Paule Bonnal AP, Ville Y. A randomized trial that compared intravaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal insert in pregnancies at high risk of fetal distress. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:247–53. [Journal]
[30]	Pandis GK, Papageorghiou AT, Otigbah CM, Howard RJ, Nicolaides KH. Randomized study of vaginal misoprostol (PGE1) and dinoprostone gel (PGE2) for induction of labor at term. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2001; 18:629–35. [Journal]
[31]	Meyer M, Pflum J, Howard D. Outpatient misoprostol compared with dinoprostone gel for pre-induction cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2005; 105:466–72. [Journal]
[32]	Beigi A, Kabiri M, Zarrinkoub F. Cervical ripening with oral misoprostol at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003; 83: 251-55. [Journal]
[33]	Buser D, Mora G, Arias F. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices. Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 89:581–5. [Journal]
[34]	Bartha JL, Comino-Delgado R, Garcia-Benasach F, Martinez-del-Fresno P, Moreno-Corral LJ. Oral misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized comparison. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96:465–9. [Journal]
[35]	Crane JMG, Butler B, Young DC, Hannah ME. Misoprostol compared with prostaglandin E2 for labour induction in women at term with intact membranes and unfavourable cervix: A systematic review. BJOG 2006; 113:1366-76. [Journal]
[36]	De Aquino MMA, Cecatti JG. Misoprostol vs oxytocin for labour induction in term and post-term pregnancy: Randomized controlled trial. Sao Paulo Med J 2003; 121: 102-6. [Journal]

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Saima Ali, Shumaila Mubasher, Ambreen Naveed Haq. (2014). A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term. Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2(6), 81-85. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Saima Ali; Shumaila Mubasher; Ambreen Naveed Haq. A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2014, 2(6), 81-85. doi: 10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Saima Ali, Shumaila Mubasher, Ambreen Naveed Haq. A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term. J Gynecol Obstet. 2014;2(6):81-85. doi: 10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11,
  author = {Saima Ali and Shumaila Mubasher and Ambreen Naveed Haq},
  title = {A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term},
  journal = {Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {81-85},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jgo.20140206.11},
  abstract = {Our objective was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol and tablet PGE2 for induction of labor at term.Methods: In this RCT a total of 140 women at term gestation were given either misoprostol (50 mcg) or prostaglandin E2 (3 mg) for induction of labour. The study was conducted at the Gynae/Obstetrics department, PAEC Hospital Islamabad, in a period of six months. All women requiring induction, having gestational age > 37 weeks, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation, bishop score < 6 and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were included in the study. The study outcome was measurement of efficacy in terms of induction delivery interval, number of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours, mode of delivery, total doses, need for oxytocin and number of successful inductions. Results: The mean age and average gestational age was similar in the two groups of patients. In group A (51.4%) patients required two doses while in group B (32.9%) took two doses. Similarly, (60%) patients required oxytocin in group A compared to (50%) in group B. The mean delivery induction interval was 10.8 hours (650 minutes) in group A compared to 9.01 hours (541 minutes) in group B; and this difference in two means is statistically significant. In group A (18.5%) patients required emergency cesarean section while in group B (27.1%) needed cesarean section. The major indication for emergency cesarean section in group B was fetal distress. Therefore misoprostol can play a very important role in the practice of obstetrics and gynecology in resource depleted countries where other prostaglandins are expensive and storage at low temperature is a problem.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term
AU  - Saima Ali
AU  - Shumaila Mubasher
AU  - Ambreen Naveed Haq
Y1  - 2014/10/30
PY  - 2014
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
T2  - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
JF  - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
JO  - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
SP  - 81
EP  - 85
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2376-7820
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
AB  - Our objective was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol and tablet PGE2 for induction of labor at term.Methods: In this RCT a total of 140 women at term gestation were given either misoprostol (50 mcg) or prostaglandin E2 (3 mg) for induction of labour. The study was conducted at the Gynae/Obstetrics department, PAEC Hospital Islamabad, in a period of six months. All women requiring induction, having gestational age > 37 weeks, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation, bishop score < 6 and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were included in the study. The study outcome was measurement of efficacy in terms of induction delivery interval, number of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours, mode of delivery, total doses, need for oxytocin and number of successful inductions. Results: The mean age and average gestational age was similar in the two groups of patients. In group A (51.4%) patients required two doses while in group B (32.9%) took two doses. Similarly, (60%) patients required oxytocin in group A compared to (50%) in group B. The mean delivery induction interval was 10.8 hours (650 minutes) in group A compared to 9.01 hours (541 minutes) in group B; and this difference in two means is statistically significant. In group A (18.5%) patients required emergency cesarean section while in group B (27.1%) needed cesarean section. The major indication for emergency cesarean section in group B was fetal distress. Therefore misoprostol can play a very important role in the practice of obstetrics and gynecology in resource depleted countries where other prostaglandins are expensive and storage at low temperature is a problem.
VL  - 2
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Saima Ali

Pakistan Atomic Energy Commision Hospital (PAEC), Islamabad, Pakistan
Shumaila Mubasher

Pakistan Atomic Energy Commision Hospital (PAEC), Islamabad, Pakistan
Ambreen Naveed Haq

Pakistan Atomic Energy Commision Hospital (PAEC), Islamabad, Pakistan

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Saima Ali, Shumaila Mubasher, Ambreen Naveed Haq. (2014). A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term. Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2(6), 81-85. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Saima Ali; Shumaila Mubasher; Ambreen Naveed Haq. A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term. J. Gynecol. Obstet. 2014, 2(6), 81-85. doi: 10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Saima Ali, Shumaila Mubasher, Ambreen Naveed Haq. A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term. J Gynecol Obstet. 2014;2(6):81-85. doi: 10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11,
  author = {Saima Ali and Shumaila Mubasher and Ambreen Naveed Haq},
  title = {A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term},
  journal = {Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics},
  volume = {2},
  number = {6},
  pages = {81-85},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jgo.20140206.11},
  abstract = {Our objective was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol and tablet PGE2 for induction of labor at term.Methods: In this RCT a total of 140 women at term gestation were given either misoprostol (50 mcg) or prostaglandin E2 (3 mg) for induction of labour. The study was conducted at the Gynae/Obstetrics department, PAEC Hospital Islamabad, in a period of six months. All women requiring induction, having gestational age > 37 weeks, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation, bishop score < 6 and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were included in the study. The study outcome was measurement of efficacy in terms of induction delivery interval, number of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours, mode of delivery, total doses, need for oxytocin and number of successful inductions. Results: The mean age and average gestational age was similar in the two groups of patients. In group A (51.4%) patients required two doses while in group B (32.9%) took two doses. Similarly, (60%) patients required oxytocin in group A compared to (50%) in group B. The mean delivery induction interval was 10.8 hours (650 minutes) in group A compared to 9.01 hours (541 minutes) in group B; and this difference in two means is statistically significant. In group A (18.5%) patients required emergency cesarean section while in group B (27.1%) needed cesarean section. The major indication for emergency cesarean section in group B was fetal distress. Therefore misoprostol can play a very important role in the practice of obstetrics and gynecology in resource depleted countries where other prostaglandins are expensive and storage at low temperature is a problem.},
 year = {2014}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - A Comparison of Vaginal Misoprostol and Prostaglandin E2 for Induction of Labour at Term
AU  - Saima Ali
AU  - Shumaila Mubasher
AU  - Ambreen Naveed Haq
Y1  - 2014/10/30
PY  - 2014
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
T2  - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
JF  - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
JO  - Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics
SP  - 81
EP  - 85
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2376-7820
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jgo.20140206.11
AB  - Our objective was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol and tablet PGE2 for induction of labor at term.Methods: In this RCT a total of 140 women at term gestation were given either misoprostol (50 mcg) or prostaglandin E2 (3 mg) for induction of labour. The study was conducted at the Gynae/Obstetrics department, PAEC Hospital Islamabad, in a period of six months. All women requiring induction, having gestational age > 37 weeks, singleton pregnancy with cephalic presentation, bishop score < 6 and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were included in the study. The study outcome was measurement of efficacy in terms of induction delivery interval, number of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours, mode of delivery, total doses, need for oxytocin and number of successful inductions. Results: The mean age and average gestational age was similar in the two groups of patients. In group A (51.4%) patients required two doses while in group B (32.9%) took two doses. Similarly, (60%) patients required oxytocin in group A compared to (50%) in group B. The mean delivery induction interval was 10.8 hours (650 minutes) in group A compared to 9.01 hours (541 minutes) in group B; and this difference in two means is statistically significant. In group A (18.5%) patients required emergency cesarean section while in group B (27.1%) needed cesarean section. The major indication for emergency cesarean section in group B was fetal distress. Therefore misoprostol can play a very important role in the practice of obstetrics and gynecology in resource depleted countries where other prostaglandins are expensive and storage at low temperature is a problem.
VL  - 2
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download