A randomised controlled trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal gel for inducing labour at term. [Comparative study of the effect of intravaginal misoprostol at 50 and 100 micrograms in cervical ripening and labor induction]. A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. A comparison of various routes and dosages of misoprostol for cervical ripening and the induction of labor. A randomised comparison of oral misoprostol and vaginal prostaglandin E2 tablets in labour induction at term. A comparison of differing dosing regimens of vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Randomized controlled trial of 50 and 100 mcg of misoprostol for induction of labor at term. A comparison between single dose of 50 microg oral misoprostol and 25 microg vaginal misoprostol for labor induction. No benefit, but increased harm from high dose (100 microg) misoprostol for induction of labour: a randomised trial of high vs. low (50 microg) dose misoprostol. A comparison between 50 mcg oral misoprostol every 4 hours and 6 hours for labor induction: a prospective randomized controlled trial. A double-blind randomized trial of two dose regimens of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a randomized controlled trial. A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a randomised trial. Randomized trial in multiparous patients: investigating a single vs. two-dose regimen of intravaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol and intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labor at term. Safety and efficacy of misoprostol orally and vaginally: a randomized trial. Misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a more effective agent than dinoprostone vaginal gel. Labor induction at term: a comparison of the effects of 50 microg and 25 microg vaginal misoprostol. Controlled-release misoprostol vaginal insert in parous women for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. A randomized comparison of one single dose of vaginal 50 microg misoprostol with 3 mg dinoprostone in pre-induction cervical ripening. Misoprostol for cervical ripening at and near term--a comparative study. Randomized trial of two doses of the prostaglandin E1 analog misoprostol for labor induction. A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Randomized comparison of vaginal (200 microg every 3 h) and oral (400 microg every 3 h) misoprostol when combined with mifepristone in termination of second trimester pregnancy. Induction of labor with misoprostol for premature rupture of membranes beyond thirty-six weeks' gestation. Oral misoprostol (100 microg) versus vaginal misoprostol (25 microg) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison. Prospective randomized clinical trial of inpatient cervical ripening with stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol. Oral misoprostol for premature rupture of membranes at term. A double-blind comparison of the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 to induce labor. Titrated oral compared with vaginal misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Sublingual compared with oral misoprostol in term labour induction: a randomised controlled trial. Vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Sublingual misoprostol before first trimester abortion: a comparative study using two dose regimens. Comparison of vaginal and oral misoprostol, for the induction of labour in women with intra-uterine foetal death. Comparison of 25 and 50 microg vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction of cervical ripening and labor induction. Misoprostol: an effective agent for cervical ripening and labor induction. A randomised trial of oral versus vaginal administration of misoprostol for the purpose of mid-trimester termination of pregnancy. Labor induction post-term with 25 micrograms vs. 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol. Vaginal misoprostol versus concentrated oxytocin and vaginal PGE2 for second-trimester labor induction. Induction of labor with 50 and 100 microg of misoprostol: comparison of maternal and fetal outcomes. A randomized comparison between intravaginal misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 for labor induction. Efficacy and safety of misoprostol in induction of labour in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour at term: randomised controlled trial. Labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol in term premature rupture of membranes: a randomized study. A comparison of 100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours and 6 hours for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Vaginal misoprostol in managing premature rupture of membranes. A comparison of orally administered misoprostol with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Sublingual misoprostol for the induction of labor at term. Active management of term prelabour rupture of membranes with oral misoprostol. A comparative study of vaginal misoprostol and intravenous oxytocin for induction of labour in women with intra uterine fetal death in Mulago Hospital, Uganda. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of two different doses of misoprostol suppositories with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. A randomized controlled trial comparing two protocols for the use of misoprostol in midtrimester pregnancy termination. Extemporaneous preparation of misoprostol gel for cervical ripening: a randomized trial. A comparison of two dosage regimens of oral misoprostol for labor induction at term. A comparison of orally administered misoprostol to intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women with favorable cervical examinations. Administration of 400 μg of misoprostol to augment routine active management of the third stage of labor. A prospective randomized study comparing misoprostol and oxytocin for premature rupture of membranes at term. Induction of labor in great grandmultipara with misoprostol. A randomized controlled trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter plus oxytocin for labor induction. Induction of labor in toxemia with misoprostol. Labor induction with prostaglandin E1 misoprostol compared with dinoprostone vaginal insert: a randomized trial. A comparison between intravaginal and oral misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Ruptured membranes at term: randomized, double-blind trial of oral misoprostol for labor induction. Induction of labour in nulliparous and multiparous women: a UK, multicentre, open-label study of intravaginal misoprostol in comparison with dinoprostone. Six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. The use of misoprostol for pre-operative cervical dilatation prior to vacuum aspiration: a randomized trial. A comparison of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol administration in second-trimester pregnancy termination for fetal abnormality. Prospective randomised controlled trial to compare safety and efficacy of intravaginal Misoprostol with intracervical Cerviprime for induction of labour with unfavourable cervix. A comparison between 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for labor induction. Misoprostol versus oxytocin for labor induction in term and post-term pregnancy: randomized controlled trial. Induction of labor with oral misoprostol for premature rupture of membranes at term in women with unfavorable cervix: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Oral misoprostol for induction of labor in prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) at term: a randomized control trial. Misoprostol is more efficacious for labor induction than prostaglandin E2, but is it associated with more risk? Vaginal misoprostol for pre-abortion cervical priming: is there an optimal evacuation time interval? Prostaglandin E2 gel versus misoprostol for cervical ripening in patients with premature rupture of membranes after 34 weeks. Randomized comparison of 3 misoprostol protocols for abortion induction at 13-20 weeks of gestation. Misoprostol versus dinoprostone for cervical priming prior to induction of labour in term pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial. Comparison of misoprostol and dinoprostone for elective induction of labour in nulliparous women at full term: a randomized prospective study. Labour characteristics and uterine activity: misoprostol compared with oxytocin in women at term with prelabour rupture of the membranes. A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. The MisoPROM study: a multicenter randomized comparison of oral misoprostol and oxytocin for premature rupture of membranes at term. A randomised trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for labour induction. Oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Oral versus self-administered vaginal misoprostol at home before surgical termination of pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial. Oral and vaginal misoprostol compared with dinoprostone for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Randomized trial of oral versus vaginal misoprostol at one day after mifepristone for early medical abortion. A randomised controlled trial of 6 and 12 hourly administration of vaginal misoprostol for second trimester pregnancy termination. Cervical ripening with oral misoprostol at term. Induction of labour with intravaginal misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 gel: a comparative study. Randomised controlled trial of the efficacy of misoprostol used as a cervical ripening agent prior to termination of pregnancy in the first trimester. Oral misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized comparison. Vaginal misoprostol compared with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices. Induction of labor with misoprostol in pregnancies with advanced maternal age. Labour induction at term--a randomised trial comparing Foley catheter plus titrated oral misoprostol solution, titrated oral misoprostol solution alone, and dinoprostone.
To compare the efficacy of low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal gel for induction of labour at term.
                A single-blind randomised controlled trial.
                Antenatal and labour ward of a UK district general hospital.
                Two hundred and sixty-eight women requiring induction of labour at term (>37 weeks of gestation) with no significant fetal or medical condition, no previous uterine surgery and no contraindication to prostaglandin.
                Misoprostol 25 microg (one-quarter of a 100 microg tablet) was inserted into the posterior vaginal fornix every 4 hours (to a maximum of six doses) or dinoprostone vaginal gel 1-2 mg 6 hourly (maximum of 3 mg in 24 hours).
                Induction-to-vaginal delivery interval.
                Requirements for oxytocin, mode of delivery, number of women delivering < 24 hours, incidence of uterine contraction abnormalities, incidence of abnormal cardiotocograph (CTG) recordings, 5-minute Apgar scores, umbilical cord pH recordings, analgesia requirements, admission to NICU and blood loss at delivery.
                There were no significant differences between the two groups in induction-to-vaginal delivery interval, mode of delivery, number of women delivering within 24 hours and neonatal outcomes. The incidence of uterine contraction abnormalities (tachysystole and hyperstimulation) and the incidence of abnormal CTG recordings were also similar for both groups.
                Low dose vaginal misoprostol is as effective as dinoprostone gel for inducing labour at term. There would be substantial cost savings, estimated at around 3.9 million UK pounds per annum, for maternity services if low dose misoprostol became the agent of choice for inducing labour in the UK. The objective of this work was to compare the efficacy of 50 and 100 microg of misoprostol administered intravaginally for cervical ripening and labor induction. Ninety-five patients were randomly assigned to receive 50 microg (n=48) or 100 microg (n=47) of misoprostol. The primary measures in this study were cesarean section rate, time from induction to delivery, need for oxytocin use, rate of uterine hyperstimulation and tachysystoles, proportion of fetal distress and neonatal Apgar score. The interval from first dose of prostaglandin to delivery was significantly shorter in the 100 ,g-group (p < 0.05). The use of oxytocin augmentation was significantly higher in the 50 microg-group (64.6% vs. 31.9%). There were 9 cases (18.8%) of tachysystole in the 50-microg group and 12 cases (25.5%) in the 100 microg-group (p NS). The cesarean section rate was double in the 100 microg-group and the difference was statically significant (p < 0.05). There was no report of uterine rupture. It can be concluded that 50 microg of misoprostol applied in the posterior vaginal fornix every 4 hours is an effective dosage for labor induction and has less adverse effects and complications than the 100 microg dose. The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy and safety of oral (100 microg) and vaginal (50 microg) misoprostol for labor induction.
                Ninety-nine patients with indications for labor induction randomly received 100 microg oral misoprostol every 4 h or 50 microg vaginal misoprostol every 4 h, using maximum six doses. Mean induction to delivery interval, mode of delivery, rates of tachysystole, hypertonus and hyperstimulation syndrome, oxytocin use, number of doses used, failed induction rate and neonatal outcomes were compared for the two groups.
                Mean dose of misoprostol used for oral and vaginal misoprostol groups were 2.17+/-1.35 and 1.91+/-0.94, respectively (p=0.65). There were two failed inductions in the oral (4%) and one failed induction (2.5%) in the vaginal group after a total of six doses of misoprostol (p=0.58). There was no significant difference for the mean induction to delivery interval, to the beginning of active phase interval, active phase duration, second stage duration and the number of women who received oxytocin for induction or augmentation between the two groups (p>0.05). There were also no significant differences for intrapartum complications and neonatal outcomes between the oral and vaginal misoprostol groups (p>0.05).
                Our findings indicate that, in a closely supervised hospital setting with adequate monitoring, 100 microg oral misoprostol has the potential to induce labor as safely and effectively as its 50 microg vaginal analogue. As oral use of the drug is easier for both the patient and the doctor, oral misoprostol will probably be more preferable than the vaginal route. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of different routes of misoprostol administration for cervical ripening and the induction of labor.
                Three hundred thirty women at > or = 32 weeks gestation with a Bishop score < or = 6 and an indication for induction were randomized to 1 of 3 double-blinded groups: (1) 25 microg orally administered misoprostol plus 25 microg vaginally administered misoprostol, (2) orally administered placebo plus 25 microg vaginally administered misoprostol, or (3) 25 microg orally administered misoprostol plus vaginally administered placebo. Doses were repeated every 4 hours until onset of labor or a maximum of 12 doses were given. The primary outcome of the trial was vaginal delivery within 24 hours of the initiation of induction. Secondary outcomes were the time from induction to delivery, need for oxytocin augmentation, mode of delivery, frequency of side effects, and neonatal and maternal outcome. Analysis of variance, chi-square test, and logistic regression were used for analysis.
                There were no significant differences in maternal characteristics or indications for induction. The percentage of women who achieved vaginal delivery within 24 hours was highest in the vaginally administered misoprostol group: 67% compared with 53% in the oral-plus-vaginal group (P < .05) and 36% in the oral group (P < .05). The median time to vaginal delivery was shorter in the vaginal and oral-plus-vaginal misoprostol groups, 13.5 hours and 14.3 hours, respectively, when compared with 23.9 hours in the oral group (P < .05). The rate of cesarean delivery was lowest in the vaginal misoprostol group (17% compared with 30% in the oral-plus-vaginal group and 32% in the oral group; P < .05). Uterine tachysystole occurred least frequently in the oral misoprostol group (10% compared with 32% in the vaginal group and 34% in the oral-plus-vaginal group; P < .05). Uterine hyperstimulation also occurred least frequently in the oral misopro-stol group (4% compared with 15% in the vaginal group and 22% in the oral-plus-vaginal group; P < .05).
                At the doses studied, induction of labor with vaginally administered misoprostol is more efficacious than either oral-plus-vaginal or oral-only route of administration. To compare the efficacy of 100 microg of oral misoprostol with 3 mg prostaglandin E2 vaginal tablets in term labour induction.
                A non-blinded, randomised, controlled trial.
                A tertiary level, teaching Scottish Hospital.
                Two hundred women at term with indications for labour induction and modified Bishop's cervical score of less than 8.
                The women were randomly allocated to receive either 100 microg of misoprostol orally (which could be repeated 4 hourly to a maximum of five doses if indicated), or a 3 mg tablet of prostaglandin E2 vaginally (which could be repeated in 6 hours, according to routine departmental protocol).
                The number delivering vaginally within 24 hours of the induction.
                Seventy-five women delivered vaginally in the misoprostol group and 73 in the PGE2 group. Of these, 50.7% in the misoprostol group and 54.8% in the PGE2 group delivered within 24 hours of the induction (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.7 to 1.3). More women in the misoprostol group were given oxytocin, but this was not statistically significant (60%vs 47%, RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.7). Two women in the misoprostol group had uterine hyperstimulation. The neonatal outcomes were not significantly different in the two groups. There was a pound 1100 saving on direct drug costs in the misoprostol group.
                Oral misoprostol (100 microg) has similar efficacy to vaginal PGE2 tablets, and may be an option to consider for term labour induction. Our purpose was to compare two dosing regimens of vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening and induction of labor.
                Five hundred twenty-two patients with indications for induction of labor and unfavorable cervices were randomly assigned to one of two dosing regimens of vaginally administered misoprostol. Twenty-five microgram tablets of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix either every 3 hours to a maximum of eight doses or every 6 hours to a maximum of four doses. The maximal period of cervical ripening was 24 hours regardless of the number of misoprostol doses administered. Medication was not given after either spontaneous rupture of membranes or the beginning of active labor.
                Among 522 patients enrolled, 261 were randomized to receive misoprostol every 3 hours and 261 to receive misoprostol every 6 hours. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was shorter in the 3-hour dosing group (1311.74 +/- 785.14 minutes) than in the 6-hour dosing group (1476.96 +/- 805.30 minutes) (p < 0.05). Oxytocin augmentation of labor occurred more commonly in the 6-hour dosing group (51.4%) than in the 3-hour dosing group (41.8%) (p < 0.05) [corrected]. There were no significant differences between routes of delivery. Overall, 108 patients (20.8%) were delivered by cesarean section. There was a slightly higher prevalence of tachysystole (six or more uterine contractions in a 10-minute window for two consecutive 10-minute periods) in the 3-hour group (14.6%) than in the 6-hour group (11.2%), but this difference was not statistically different. There were no significant differences in the frequency of uterine hyperstimulation or hypertonus. There was no significant difference between groups in the frequency of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings, meconium passage, 1- or 5-minute Apgar scores < 7, neonatal resuscitations, or admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit.
                Vaginally administered misoprostol is an effective agent for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Patients with the 6-hour dosing schedule had longer intervals to delivery, more frequently required oxytocin augmentation, and had more failed inductions than did patients with 3-hour dosing. Further investigation to characterize the safety of misoprostol is needed. To compare the safety and efficacy of two different regimens of misoprostol for labor induction at term, we conducted a randomized controlled trial on women presenting for induction of labor at > or =37 weeks' gestation. Eligible women were randomized to receive intravaginal misoprostol 50 microg every 4 h or 100 microg every 6 h until any of the following: 1) adequate contraction pattern (3 contractions/10 min); 2) dilatation >3 cm; 3) artificial rupture of membranes; or 4) signs of uterine hyperstimulation. Use of oxytocin during labor was at the discretion of the managing clinician. The main outcome variable considered for analysis was cesarean section rate. Secondary outcome measures were induction to delivery interval and neonatal outcome (Apgar scores, meconium staining, and umbilical artery pH). A total of 58 women were randomized to receive either misoprostol 100 microg (n=26) or 50 microg (n=32). The 100 and 50 microg groups had similar mean Bishop's scores at induction (4.0+/-2.3 vs 4.1+/-2.2, p=0.87), rates of nulliparity, use of epidural anesthesia, and oxytocin augmentation. The number of doses of misoprostol used was similar in the two groups (1.4+/-0.6 vs 1.8+/-1.2). The mean+/-standard deviation time to delivery (hours) (11.9+/-7.3 vs 14.3+/-9.6 h, p=0.30) and cesarean section rate (35% vs 19%, p=0.30, relative risk: 1.8, 95% confidence interval 0.7-5.4) were not different in the 100 vs 50 microg group. Power analysis demonstrated that 132 women would be required in each group to achieve statistical significance in the primary outcome measure (alpha=0.05, beta=0.80). Similarly, rates of 5-minute Apgar scores <7 (4% vs 3%, p=1.0), and of meconium passage (17% vs 25%, p=0.73) were not significantly different between the two groups. To compare the efficacy and safety of a single dose of 50 microg oral misoprostol with 25 microg vaginal misoprostol for labor induction.
                This study was a randomized, double-blind controlled trial conducting in pregnant women admitted at delivery room, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Medical College and Vajira Hospital between March 2002 and January 2005. All 146 pregnancies at > or = 37 weeks' gestation who had indication for labor induction with unfavorable cervix were randomly divided into a group of single dose of 50 microg misoprostol orally or 25 microg misoprostol vaginally. Initial and six hours after misoprostol administration, Bishop scores were evaluated. Requirement of oxytocin augmentation, complication due to uterine hypertonus, incidence of vaginal delivery, Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes, and number of neonate admitted at neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were recorded.
                The baseline characteristics and median initial Bishop scores were comparable in both groups. At 6 hours after misoprostol administration the median cervical changes of women who received oral or vaginal misoprostol were statistically significant different, 3 and 4, respectively. The median time interval to vaginal delivery of women who received oral misoprostol was significantly longer than of those who had vaginal drug, 16.9 and 11.8 hours respectively. Comparable neonatal outcomes were found in both groups in terms of assigned Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes.
                A single dose of 25 microg vaginal misoprostol appears to be more effective than 50 microg oral dose in improving Bishop scores and decreasing the time to vaginal delivery in women with unfavorable cervix without severe adverse effects. Misoprostrol, a synthetic analogue of prostaglandin E(1), has been used for cervical preparation. Its ideal dose, route and frequency of administration are still under investigation. We conducted a randomised controlled trial, in a tertiary hospital in a developing country, to compare misoprostol 50 microg (low) and 100 microg (high) for effectiveness and safety in induction of labour at term. Women admitted for induction of labour with a singleton live fetus in cephalic presentation after 37 weeks' gestation were recruited. A misoprostol tablet was inserted in the posterior vaginal fornix at 8-hour intervals. Main outcomes were duration of induction, maternal and fetal complications. The mean duration of induction was 15.4 (SD 10.6) and 14.2 (SD 13.6) h in the low- and high-groups respectively (P = 0.095). There was no difference in need for augmentation with oxytocin (OR 0.82; 95% Cl 0.36-1.86) or operative delivery (OR 1.29; 95% CI 0.26-6.84). There were two uterine ruptures and four intrapartum stillbirths in the high misoprostol group. There was no difference in postpartum haemorrhage, 9.5% vs. 7.9% (P = 1.00) and admissions to the neonatal unit 18.8% vs. 17.0% (P = 0.980) in the 1ow- and high-groups) respectively. Misoprostol 50 microg was as effective as the 100 microg dose for induction of labour whereas the higher dose had an increased risk of serious complications. To compare the effectiveness and safety between 50 mcg oral misoprostol every 4 hours and 6 hours for labor induction.
                A prospective randomized controlled trial.
                Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
                Eighty nine pregnant women of at least 34 weeks' gestation with indications for labor induction in the condition of unfavourable cervix (Bishop score < or = 4) and no contraindication to prostaglandin therapy.
                All pregnant women were randomized to receive either 50 mcg misoprostol orally every 4 hours or 6 hours.
                Treatment interval from induction to vaginal delivery, maternal and neonatal complication.
                The mean treatment intervals from induction to vaginal delivery were 22.10 +/- 18.49 hours and 20.91 +/- 11.98 hours in the misoprostol group every 4 hours and 6 hours, respectively. The treatment intervals between the two groups were not statistically significant. There was also no significant difference between both groups with regard to maternal and neonatal complications.
                The effectiveness in terms of treatment interval from induction to vaginal delivery were comparable between the two groups, but administration of misoprostol every 6 hours was found to have a slightly shorter interval, although it did not reach statistical significance. No serious maternal and neonatal complication was demonstrated in both groups. Either regimen in this study can be an alternative for labor induction. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of two dosing regimens of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.
                Patients who fulfilled the study criteria were randomized to received misoprostol 25 microg or 50 microg intravaginally every 3 h for a total of eight doses for cervical ripening or until labor was established. Endpoints for successful cervical ripening was achievement of Bishop score of nine or greater, and for labor induction reaching the active phase of labor in the first 24 h. The rates of success, duration of first and second stages of labor, type of delivery, significant side effects, and neonatal outcome were measured and compared between the two study groups. Two hundred and fifty-one patients were randomized in two groups--126 received 50 microg and 125 received 25 microg misoprostol. Demographics of the two study groups were similar.
                Patients in the 50 microg group had a shorter first stage (848 min vs. 1,122 min, P < 0.007), shorter induction-to-vaginal delivery interval (933 min vs. 1,194 min, P < 0.013), decreased incidence of oxytocin augmentation (53.9% vs. 68%, P < 0.015), and decreased total units of oxytocin (2,763 mU vs. 5,236 mU, P < 0.023), but there was a higher hyperstimulation rate (19% vs. 7.2%, P < 0.005).
                Successful induction rate, delivery types, and fetal outcome were similar in both groups. Although the rate of vaginal delivery and neonatal outcome were similar in both groups, the 50 microg regimen had shorter first and second stages of labor, and a higher hyperstimulation rate that was easily manageable, allowing for flexibility in using the higher dose in low-risk pregnancies. To compare the efficacy of oral with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term.
                One hundred and fifty-three pregnant women at term with indications for induction of labor and Bishop score < or = 6 were randomly assigned to receive misoprostol either 100 microg orally or 50 microg vaginally every 6 h for 48 h. Repeated doses were given until Bishop score > or = 8 was achieved or spontaneous rupture of membranes occurred. Those who were not in labor after 48 h had labor induced with amniotomy and oxytocin. The main outcome measure was induction to delivery time.
                The median induction to vaginal delivery time in the oral group (14.3 h) was not significantly different from that of the vaginal group (15.8 h). The median number of doses was also not significantly different in the oral group compared with the vaginal group. There was a significant higher incidence of uterine tachysystole in the vaginal group compared to the oral group (17.1% vs 5.3%, P = 0.032). There was no hyperstimulation in either group. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to oxytocin augmentation, cesarean section rate, analgesic requirement, and neonatal outcomes.
                Oral administration of 100 microg misoprostol has similar efficacy to intravaginal administration of 50 microg misoprostol for labor induction with less frequent abnormal uterine contractility. 100 microg of misoprostol orally can be used as an alternative to the vaginal route for labor induction. To compare the efficacy of oral with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term.
                Randomised trial.
                Tertiary Care hospital.
                One hundred and sixty-seven women requiring induction of labour.
                The women were randomised to receive 50 microg of misoprostol orally or vaginally every 6 h until the cervix was favourable for amniotomy, spontaneous rupture of membranes, or active labour occurred. Sample size was calculated with a two-tailed alpha of 0.05 and a power of 95% to detect a 5 h difference in induction-to-delivery time. Student's t test was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous variables and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for non-Gaussian distributed continuous variables. Fisher' s exact and chi2 tests were used for comparison of categorical variables. The main outcome measure was induction to delivery time.
                The median induction to delivery time was significantly shorter with vaginal misoprostol (15.7 h range 4.3-55.7), compared with oral misoprostol (23.0 h range 3.2-141.7, P = 0.0013). The median number of doses was also significantly less in the vaginal misoprostol group, 1 (range 1-3), compared with the oral group, 2 (range 1-8), (P < 0.0001). The significant differences in outcome held true when nulliparous and multiparous women were analysed separately. There were no differences between the two routes of administration with respect to rates of hyperstimulation or neonatal asphyxia. There were more caesarean sections in the vaginal misoprostol group, but the difference was not statistically significant.
                Compared with oral misoprostol, vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term results in a shorter induction-to-delivery time, with fewer doses required per patient. Vaginal misoprostol may be associated with higher rates of caesarean section than oral misoprostol. Multiparous patients have a higher risk of hyperstimulation and uterine rupture than nulliparous patients. The minimum possible dose of uterotonic drug should be used in induction of labor for multiparous patients to avoid excessive uterine activity, which could increase both maternal and fetal risks.
                One hundred and four women were randomized to either a single dose of 50 micro g of intravaginal misoprostol in 24 h, or two consecutive doses of intravaginal 50 micro g misoprostol 6 h apart.
                The mean induction to delivery interval (789 min [95% CI: 637-941] vs. 576 min [95% CI: 484-667], p = 0.018) and delivery rate within 12 h (63% vs. 83%, p = 0.035) were higher in the two-dose group. The oxytocin augmentation rate (14% vs. 2%, p = 0.03) was higher in the single-dose group. There was a higher rate of clinician input related to suspicious cardiotocographic readings in the single-dose arm (p = 0.04). There was no statistical difference (p > 0.05) between the one- and two-dose regimens with respect to the rates of tachysystole (21% vs. 15%), hyperstimulation (3.9% vs. 0%), and meconium staining at delivery (9.8% vs. 13.2%).
                The two-dose regimen was most efficient, but both regimens were well tolerated by the fetuses. Our purpose was to compare the effect of vaginal administration of misoprostol (Cytotec) with that of dinoprostone (Cervidil) on cervical ripening and labor induction.
                Two hundred patients with indications for induction of labor and unfavorable cervical examinations were randomly assigned to receive vaginally administered misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) or the dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2) vaginal insert. Twenty-five microgram tablets of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every 4 hours for a maximum of six doses. Additional misoprostol was not given after either spontaneous rupture of membranes, adequate cervical ripening (Bishop score of > or = 8 or cervical dilatation of > or = 3 cm), or beginning of active labor. The vaginal insert, Cervidil, containing 10 mg of dinoprostone in a timed-release preparation was placed in the posterior vaginal formix for a maximum period of 24 hours. The vaginal insert was removed for spontaneous rupture of membranes, entry into active labor, adequate cervical ripening, or abnormality of uterine contractile pattern or fetal cardiac activity.
                Of the 200 patients enrolled, 99 were randomized to misoprostol and 101 to dinoprostone. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was 1 hour shorter in the misoprostol group (1296.7 +/- 722.1 minutes) than in the dinoprostone group (1360.0 +/- 792.0 minutes), but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.97). Oxytocin augmentation of labor was used in 50 (50.5%) misoprostol-treated patients and 43 (43.5%) dinoprostone-treated patients (relative risk 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.51, p = 0.35). There were no significant differences between routes of delivery with misoprostol or dinoprostone. Overall, 38 patients (19.3%) had cesarean deliveries. There was a significantly lower prevalence of tachysystole (six or more uterine contractions in a 10-minute window for two consecutive 10-minute periods) in the misoprostol group (7.1%) than in the dinoprostone group (18.4%) (relative risk 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.89, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in frequency of uterine hyperstimulation or hypertonus. Abnormal fetal heart rate tracings were found in 23 (23.2%) of misoprostol-treated patients and 35 (35.7%) of dinoprostone-treated patients (relative risk 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.52 to 1.01, p = 0.0546). No significant differences were found in meconium passage, 1- or 5-minute Apgar scores < 7, neonatal resuscitations, or admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit between the two groups.
                Vaginally administered misoprostol is as effective as dinoprostone for cervical ripening and the induction of labor. Mean time intervals to delivery, need for oxytocin augmentation, and routes of delivery were similar between the two groups. Incidence of uterine tachysystole with misoprostol every 4 hours was significantly less than with dinoprostone. To compare misoprostol 25 micrograms administered at 2-hour intervals with intracervical prostaglandin (PG) E2 in women with Bishop scores of 5 or less.
                Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either misoprostol 25 micrograms every 2 hours or a commercially available intracervical preparation containing 0.5 mg of PGE2 gel administered at 6-hour intervals for a maximum of two doses.
                Women who received misoprostol experienced a significantly reduced mean time (+/- standard deviation) from drug administration to onset of three contractions in 10 minutes, 6.7 +/- 5.8 versus 12.4 +/- 9.6 hours (P = .007). Mean time to rupture of membranes was also shorter in the misoprostol group, 9.7 +/- 5.5 versus 13.6 +/- 6.8 hours (P = .01), as was the mean time to delivery, 16.0 +/- 7.7 versus 22.4 +/- 10.9 hours (P = .006). Three patients in the misoprostol group experienced uterine hypertonus but not related fetal morbidity.
                Misoprostol is more effective than intracervical PGE2 in bringing about labor and delivery, but further work is needed to determine the ideal dosing regimen. To compare the safety and efficacy accompanying oral and vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening.
                One thousand four women with medical or obstetric indications for labor induction and unripe cervices were randomly assigned to receive oral or vaginal misoprostol. Initial doses of 200 microg oral and 50 microg vaginal misoprostol were increased to 300 microg oral and 100 microg vaginal after two doses, to a maximum of six doses. Misoprostol was given every 6 hours in both groups. We anticipated that 11% of women treated vaginally would require intervention during the ripening process. Intervention was defined as interruption of the ripening process before labor or Bishop score of 7 or a lack of response to six misoprostol doses.
                Five hundred three subjects were assigned to oral and 501 to vaginal administration. Oral misoprostol was associated with significantly higher frequencies of intervention (67 [13.3%] versus 42 [8.4%], P =.01), tachysystole (114 [23.6%] versus 85 [17.6%], P =.02), and hyperstimulation (90 [18.6%] versus 66 [13.7%], P =.04). There were no significant differences in cesarean rates (147 [29.2%] versus 120 [24.0%], P =.06), mean number of misoprostol doses used (1.5 versus 1.6, P =.18), or hours from drug administration to delivery (24.5 versus 25.4, P =.77) between the oral and vaginal groups, respectively. The numbers of deliveries between the groups within 24 hours was different (271 [56%] versus 290 [60%], P =.02), oral and vaginal, respectively. No adverse neonatal outcomes were noted.
                Oral misoprostol has similar efficacy as vaginal misoprostol but is associated with a higher frequency of excessive uterine contractility and intervention. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone vaginal gel for induction of labour at term.
                A single-blind randomised comparative trial.
                Induction and labour wards of a UK teaching hospital.
                Two hundred and eleven pregnant women at term in whom induction of labour was indicated, and with no contra-indication to the use of prostaglandins for the induction of labour.
                The women were randomly assigned to receive vaginal administration of either misoprostol 50 microg four hourly (to a maximum of four doses) or dinoprostone gel 1 mg six hourly (to a maximum of three doses).
                Time from induction to delivery, oxytocin requirement in labour, analgesic requirement, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome.
                The misoprostol group had a highly significant reduction in median induction-delivery interval compared with the dinoprostone group (14.4 hours vs 22.9 hours; P < 0.00001). In addition, more women delivered after only one dose (77% vs 49%; P < 0.0001, OR 3.51, 95% CI 1.94-6.35), and within 12 and 24 hours. There was a reduced need for oxytocin augmentation in labour (21% vs 47%; P < 0.0001, OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.16-0.54). There was no difference in analgesia requirement in labour, or in mode of delivery. There were no adverse neonatal outcomes associated with the use of misoprostol. Women in the misoprostol group experienced more pain in the interval between induction and being given analgesia in labour, but this did not reach statistical significance.
                Misoprostol 50 microg vaginally is a more effective induction agent than 1 mg dinoprostone vaginal gel, with no apparent adverse effects on mode of delivery, or on the fetus. The higher pain scores in the misoprostol group must be balanced against the reduction in time spent having labour induced, and the reduction in need for intravenous oxytocin augmentation. Further randomised studies must continue to exclude the possibility of rare adverse side effects. To compare the effects of 50 microg of vaginal misoprostol with 25 microg for labor induction at term.
                One hundred and forty-seven pregnant women with indications for labor induction and cervical Bishop's score of < or = 6 were randomly assigned to receive either 50 microg (n = 74) or 25 microg (n = 73) of vaginal misoprostol every four hours until either a Bishop's score of > or = 8 or adequate uterine contraction frequency had been achieved. Induction-to-vaginal-delivery time was considered the primary outcome measure.
                Mean induction-to-vaginal-delivery time was significantly shorter in the 50-microg group than in the 25-microg group (526 +/- 141 min vs 745 +/- 218 min, respectively); oxytocin was administered to 65.8% of the patients in the 25-microg group and to 35.1% in the 50-microg group (p < .05). The incidence of tachysystole was significantly higher in the 50-microg group than in the 25-microg group (12% vs 2.7%, p < .05). We found no statistically significant difference between the two groups with respect to the rate of primary cesarean section, incidence of hyperstimulation syndrome, or neonatal outcome (p > .05).
                Fifty micrograms of vaginally administered misoprostol is an effective and inexpensive means of inducing labor at term. Uterine tachysystole may be associated more frequently with a 50-microg dose of vaginal misoprostol than with a 25-microg dose. Clinicians must accurately document the frequency and intensity of uterine contractions before every 50-microg dose of misoprostol is administered. To assess the ability of a controlled-release misoprostol vaginal insert to induce labor using dose reservoirs of 25, 50, 100, and 200 microg.
                This double-blind, dose ranging, randomized study was carried out in parous women requiring induction of labor at term. Each woman was randomly assigned to receive a single misoprostol vaginal insert that could remain in place for up to 24 hours and was removed for onset of active labor, an adverse event, or having reached 24 hours in situ. The primary outcome measure was time from insertion of the misoprostol vaginal insert to vaginal delivery of the neonate.
                A total of 124 women participated in the study. The median time to vaginal delivery was 27.5, 19.1, 13.1, and 10.6 hours for the 25-, 50-, 100-, and 200-microg doses, respectively. The percentage of women who delivered vaginally within 12 hours was 9%, 14%, 47%, and 53% (P<.001 using the 25-microg group as the comparator) and within 24 hours was 42%, 79%, 81%, and 70% (P=.003). Uterine hyperstimulation syndrome occurred in one woman who received the 25-mug, two women who received the 100-microg, and three women who received the 200-microg dose reservoirs.
                Misoprostol vaginal inserts effectively induced labor in pregnant parous women at term.
                I. To compare the efficacy and safety of one single dose of 50 pg misoprostol to one single dose of 3 mg dinoprostone administered vaginally for pre-induction cervical ripening in term-pregnant women, who had indications for induction of labor with unripe cervices.
                A randomized double-blind controlled trial.
                Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Medical College and Vajira Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
                One hundred and forty-three singleton pregnant women of > or = 37 weeks of gestation, who had indications for termination of pregnancy. All patients had a Bishop score of 0-6, without contraindications for labor induction.
                The subjects were stratified by parity to nullipara and multipara group. The subjects in each stratum were allocated by randomization to receive a single dose of 50 microg misoprostol or 3 mg dinoprostone, administered vaginally. Twenty-four hours after medication, oxytocin augmentation was given to both groups. Main outcome measure: The Bishop score of cervix at 24 hours after insertion of the studied drugs, the occurrence of abnormal uterine contraction, and the number of vaginal deliveries within 24, 48 hours.
                The demographic data and the initial Bishop score (median score 3.5 versus 4.0) were comparable in both groups. The change of score at 24 hours was one unit higher in misoprostol-treated patients compared with dinoprostone-treated patients (mean change score 6.5 versus 5.5, with 95 per cent CI 0.04 to 2.1, p=0.042) but was not of clinical importance. There was a higher frequency of hyperstimulation syndrome in the misoprostol group (6.9% vs 0%) during 8 hours of cervical ripening. Although the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.058), it was clinically important. Comparing vaginal deliveries between the misoprostol and dinoprostone groups, the frequencies of delivery within 24 hours were 46.3 per cent versus 35.7 per cent (p=0.350), and within 48 hours were 88.9 per cent versus 89.3 per cent (p>0.05), non-significantly different. No significant differences were noted between misoprostol and dinoprostone in terms of interval from start of medication to vaginal delivery and neonatal outcomes.
                The efficacy of a single 50 microg dose of vaginally administered misoprostol, is not clinically different to 3 mg dinoprostone in cervical ripening. Although the study was not sufficiently large to detect the differences in abnormal uterine contractions between the two groups, there was a higher frequency of hyperstimulation syndrome in the misoprostol group compared to the dinoprostone group. Close utero-fetal monitoring in misoprostol-treated patients is needed. To compare the safety and efficacy of misoprostol with that of dinoprostone for the induction of labour at term, or near term.
                Three hundred and ninety-six women with term pregnancies were randomised to receive either oral or vaginal misoprostol, or dinoprostone. Women who had had a previous caesarean section (CS) or those with a malpresentation or who were parity > or = 5, were excluded. The control group received dinoprostone 1 mg inserted in the posterior fornix and repeated 6-hourly to a maximum of three doses. The study group received either oral misoprostol 20 micrograms 2-hourly to a maximum of four doses (80 micrograms), or vaginal misoprostol 25 micrograms in the posterior fornix with a switch to the oral misoprostol regimen if there was no change in the Bishop's score or no palpable uterine contractions.
                There was no significant difference in vaginal delivery rate within 24 hours between the groups (58.1% v. 58%, p = 0.633). There were no significant differences in CS rates between the groups; however, more CSs were performed for fetal distress in the misoprostol group than in the dinoprostone group (28% v. 25%). There was a significantly higher incidence of hyperstimulation in the vaginal misoprostol group (21.4%) than in the other two groups (oral misoprostol 16.5%, dinoprostone 8.9%) (p = 0.004). The incidence of meconium staining of liquor was comparable between the groups.
                In selected women, the efficacy of misoprostol for the induction of labour at term is similar to that of dinoprostone but misoprostol is associated with a higher incidence of hyperstimulation. Our purpose was to compare the safety and effectiveness of intravaginally administered misoprostol at doses of 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms for indicated labor induction in patients with an unfavorable cervix.
                Three hundred ninety-nine patients received either 25 micrograms or 50 micrograms of misoprostol, placed intravaginally in the posterior fornix, in this randomized double-blind trial. The dose was repeated every 3 hours until adequate labor was achieved (at least three contractions in 10 minutes).
                Among 399 patients evaluated, 192 patients were allocated to the 25 micrograms group and 207 patients to the 50 micrograms group. The start-to-delivery interval was shorter in the 50 micrograms group (826 minutes vs 970 minutes, p = 0.02). The incidence of vaginal delivery after one dose was higher in the 50 micrograms group (38.2% vs 25.0%, p = 0.007). Patients receiving 25 micrograms required oxytocin augmentation more frequently than did those receiving 50 micrograms (27.1% vs 16.9%, p = 0.02). No differences were noted in the cesarean or other operative delivery rates among patients in the two treatment groups. The incidence of newborns with a cord pH < 7.16 was greater in the 50 micrograms group (13.0% vs 6.8%, p = 0.04). Although the incidence of hyperstimulation was similar between the groups, the incidence of tachysystole was higher in the 50 micrograms group (32.8% vs 15.6%, p = 0.0001).
                Although a dose of 50 micrograms is associated with a shorter start-to-delivery interval and a higher incidence of vaginal delivery after one dose, 25 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol is effective and associated with a lower incidence of tachysystole and cord pH values < 7.16. Our purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) gel for preinduction cervical ripening and induction of labor.
                One hundred thirty-five patients with indications for induction of labor and unfavorable cervices were randomly assigned to receive either intravaginal misoprostol or intracervical dinoprostone. Fifty microgram tablets of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every 3 hours for a maximum of six doses. Prostaglandin E2 in gel form, 0.5 mg, was placed into the endocervix every 6 hours for a maximum of three doses. Medication was not given after either spontaneous rupture of membranes or beginning of active labor.
                Among 135 patients enrolled, 68 received misoprostol and 67 received dinoprostone. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was shorter in the misoprostol group (903.3 +/- 482.1 minutes) than in the dinoprostone group (1410.9 +/- 869.1 minutes) (p < 0.001). Oxytocin augmentation of labor occurred more often in the dinoprostone group (65.7%) than in the misoprostol group (33.8%) (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between routes of delivery. Ten of the misoprostol-treated patients (14.7%) and 13 of the dinoprostone-treated patients (19.4%) had cesarean deliveries. There was a higher prevalence of tachysystole (six or more uterine contractions in a 10-minute window for two consecutive 10-minute periods) in the misoprostol group (36.7%) than in the dinoprostone group (11.9%) (p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in frequency of uterine hyperstimulation or hypertonus. There was a higher prevalence of meconium passage in the misoprostol group (27.9%) than in the dinoprostone group (10.5%) (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in frequency of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings, 1- or 5-minute Apgar scores < 7, neonatal resuscitations, or admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit between the two groups.
                Vaginally administered misoprostol is an effective agent for cervical ripening and induction of labor; however when given at this dosage, it is associated with a higher prevalence of tachysystole and meconium passage than is dinoprostone. Further studies to compare the safety of misoprostol to that of dinoprostone and to delineate an optimal dosing regimen for misoprostol are needed. It is known that when misoprostol is given at 200 microg every 3 h after mifepristone pretreatment, the vaginal route is more effective than the oral route. However, women prefer the oral route. This randomized study was to test our hypothesis that oral misoprostol 400 microg is as effective as vaginal misoprostol 200 microg when given every 3 h in termination of second trimester pregnancy after priming with mifepristone. A total of 142 patients was randomly assigned to group 1 (200 mg mifepristone + 400 microg oral misoprostol every 3 h up to five doses) or group 2 (200 mg mifepristone + 200 microg vaginal misoprostol every 3 h up to five doses). The incidence of side-effects and the preference study were assessed through a standardized questionnaire during and after the abortion. For the oral group, both the incidence of diarrhoea (40.0 versus 23.2%, P = 0.03) and the amount of drug used (1734 compared with 812 microg, P < 0.0001) were significantly higher than that of the vaginal group but the incidence of fever appeared to be lower (not significant). There was no significant difference in complete abortion rate: 81.4% in the oral group and 75.4% in the vaginal group. The median induction-abortion interval was similar in the two groups (10.4 versus 10.0 h). The percentage of women who aborted in 24 h was also similar: 57/70 (81.4%) in the oral group and 58/69 (87.0%) in the vaginal group. Overall, 82.0% of women preferred the oral route. Oral misoprostol (400 microg) given every 3 h up to five doses, when combined with mifepristone, was as effective as the vaginal (200 microg) route in second trimester termination of pregnancy. This regimen could also be offered to those women who found repeated vaginal administration unacceptable. Our purpose was to compare vaginally administered misoprostol (Cytotec) with intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women with premature rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks' gestation.
                Two hundred subjects with rupture of membranes without labor were randomly assigned to receive vaginally administered misoprostol or intravenous oxytocin. Twenty-five micrograms of misoprostol (Cytotec) was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix. If cervical ripening (Bishop score of > or = 8 or cervical dilatation of > or = 3 cm) or active labor did not occur, a single repeat dose of misoprostol was given 6 hours later. Oxytocin was administered intravenously by a standardized incremental infusion protocol to a maximum dose of 22 mU per minute.
                Of the 197 subjects evaluated, 98 received misoprostol and 99 oxytocin. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was about 1 hour longer in the misoprostol group (811.5 +/- 511.4 minutes) than in the oxytocin group (747.0 +/- 448.0 minutes) (P = .65, log transformed data). Oxytocin administration was necessary in 37 of 98 (37.8%) of misoprostol-treated subjects. Vaginal delivery occurred in 85 misoprostol-treated subjects (86.7%) and 82 (85.9%) oxytocin-treated subjects (relative risk 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.78, P = .45) with the remainder undergoing cesarean birth. There was no difference in the incidence of tachysystole (six or more uterine contractions in a 10-minute window for two consecutive 10-minute periods) or hypertonus between the two groups. There was no significant difference in frequency of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings between the two groups (29.6% in the misoprostol group and 28.9% in the oxytocin group, P = .91). Chorioamnionitis was diagnosed in 28 (28.6%) misoprostol-treated subjects and 26 (26.3%) oxytocin-treated subjects (P = .72, relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.45). No significant differences were found in the incidence of fetal meconium (8.1% and 9.1%), 1- or 5-minute Apgar scores < 7 (11.0% and 10.2% of 1-minute Apgar scores, and 2.0% and 2.0% of 5-minute Apgar scores), neonatal resuscitation (24.5% and 27.6%), or admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (25.5% and 32.3%) between the two groups.
                Vaginal administration of misoprostol (Cytotec) is an effective alternative to oxytocin infusion for labor induction in women with premature rupture of the membranes near term. The incidence of untoward effects is similar with use of the two agents. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol (25 microg) to oral misoprostol (100 microg) in labor induction at term.
                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 microg of oral misoprostol or 25 microg 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.
                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.
                Vaginal misoprostol in its currently recommended dose of 25 microg seems to be more efficacious than the 100 microg oral dose. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening before induction of labor.
                Two hundred and four women between 32 to 42 weeks of gestation with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 6) and an indication for labor induction were randomized to receive oral or vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours up to 4 doses. The oral misoprostol group received 50 microg initially followed by 100 microg in each subsequent dose. The vaginal group received 25 microg in each dose. The primary outcome was the interval from first misoprostol dose to delivery. Patient satisfaction and side effects were assessed by surveys completed after delivery.
                Ninety-three (45.6%) women received oral misoprostol; 111 (54.4%) received vaginal misoprostol. There was no difference in the average interval from the first dose of misoprostol to delivery in the oral (21.1 + 7.9 hrs) and vaginal (21.5 + 11.0 hrs, P = NS) misoprostol groups. The incidence of hyperstimulation in the oral group was 2.2% vs 5.4% in the vaginal group, P = NS. Eighteen patients in the oral group (19.4%) and 36 (32.4%) in the vaginal group underwent cesarean section (P < .05). This difference was attributed to better tolerance of more doses of misoprostol by the women in the oral group. There was no difference in side effects (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, shivering) between groups. Fourteen percent of women in the vaginal group versus 7.5% in the oral group were dissatisfied with the use of misoprostol (P = NS).
                Stepwise oral misoprostol (50 microg followed by 100 microg) appears to be as effective as vaginal misoprostol (25 microg) for cervical ripening with a low incidence of hyperstimulation, no increase in side effects, a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is associated with a lower cesarean section rate. The study was undertaken to compare the efficacy, safety, and maternal satisfaction of oral misoprostol and intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women with premature rupture of membranes at term.
                One hundred five women were stratified by parity and randomly assigned to oral misoprostol 75 microg every 4 hours as needed to establish labor or to intravenous oxytocin.
                The induction to vaginal delivery time with oral misoprostol was 737 (+/-426) minutes compared with 573 (+/-318) minutes with oxytocin (P=.04). The incidence of hyperstimulation was lower in the misoprostol group (6.0% vs 27.1%, P=.005). Women were more likely to be very satisfied with their care in the misoprostol group (86.0% vs 63.4%, P=.02).
                In women at term with premature rupture of membranes, oral misoprostol resulted in a longer induction to vaginal delivery interval but increased maternal satisfaction and less hyperstimulation compared with intravenous oxytocin. Further research is needed to assess uncommon neonatal and maternal outcomes. Our purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginally administered misoprostol versus prostaglandin E2 for labor induction in a double-blind, randomized trial.
                One hundred three patients with indications for labor induction (including prelabor rupture of membranes) were randomized and received either misoprostol 50 micrograms or prostaglandin E2 (dinoprostone) 3 mg intravaginally. The dose was repeated 6, 24, and 30 hours after the first dose until active labor was achieved. For proper blinding, the drugs were prepared as identical-looking vaginal tablets.
                With use of a random number-generated table 52 patients were allocated to the misoprostol group and 51 to the prostaglandin E2 group. After exclusion of 3 patients, 50 in each group were evaluated. Delivery within 24 hours after administration occurred more often in the misoprostol group (70% vs 46% in the prostaglandin E2 group, p = 0.009), and fewer patients in this group needed more than two doses (12% vs 30%, p = 0.027). No difference in cesarean section rate (12% vs 14%, p = 0.67), fetal heart rate anomalies (33% vs 34%, p = 0.89), tachysystole (8% vs 14%, p = 0.37), hyperstimulation syndrome (0% vs 2%, not significant), meconium passage (28% vs 18%, p = 0.22), and fetal outcome (Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes, arterial and venous umbilical cord blood pH, transfer to neonatal intensive care unit) was noted between the two groups.
                Intravaginal misoprostol is a safe drug for labor induction with superior effectiveness compared with intravaginal prostaglandin E2. To compare the efficacy and safety of titrated oral misoprostol and vaginal misoprostol for labor induction.
                Women between 34 and 42 weeks of gestation with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score less than or equal to 6) and an indication for labor induction were randomLy assigned to receive titrated oral or vaginal misoprostol. The titrated oral misoprostol group received a basal unit of 20 mL misoprostol solution (1 mcg/mL) every 1 hour for four doses and then were titrated against individual uterine response. The vaginal group received 25 mcg every 4 hours until attaining a more favorable cervix. Vaginal delivery within 12 hours was the primary outcome. The data were analyzed by intention-to-treat.
                Titrated oral misoprostol was given to 101 (48.8%) women and vaginal misoprostol to 106 (51.2%) women. Completed vaginal delivery occurred within 12 hours in 75 (74.3%) women in the titrated oral group and 27 (25.5%) women in the vaginal group (relative risk [RR] 8.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.52-15.76). The incidence of hyperstimulation was 0.0% in the titrated oral group compared with 11.3% in the vaginal group (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01-0.61). Although more women experienced nausea (10.9%) in the titrated oral group (RR 27.07, 95% CI 1.57-465.70), fewer infants had Apgar scores of less than 7 at 1 minute in the titrated oral group than in the vaginal group (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01-0.76).
                Titrated oral misoprostol is associated with a lower incidence of uterine hyperstimulation and a lower cesarean delivery rate than vaginal misoprostol for labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervix.
                ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00529295
                I. To compare the efficacy and patient acceptability of 50 microg of sublingual misoprostol with 100 microg of oral misoprostol in the induction of labour at term.
                Non-blinded randomised comparative trial.
                Tertiary level UK Hospital.
                Two hundred and fifty women at term with indications for labour induction.
                Fifty micrograms of sublingual misoprostol or 100 microg of oral misoprostol was administered every four hours after random allocation, to a maximum of five doses.
                Number of patients delivering vaginally within 24 hours of the induction, mode of delivery, neonatal outcomes and patient acceptability.
                There was no significant difference in the number of women delivering vaginally within 24 hours of the induction in the sublingual group as compared with the oral group (62.8% vs 59%, RR 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-2.1), or in the mean induction to delivery time (21.8 vs 24.1 h, mean difference 2.3 h 95% CI -2.2 to +6.7). There was no difference in the uterine hyperstimulation rates (1.6% in both groups), operative delivery rates or neonatal outcomes. In the sublingual group, 92.6% found the induction acceptable with 15.8% finding the tablets with an unpleasant taste, while in the oral group it was 96.9% and 4%, respectively. More patients in the oral group thought that they would consider the same method of induction again as compared with the sublingual group (58.6% vs 40%, RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.04-1.9).
                Fifty micrograms of sublingual misoprostol every four hours has the same efficacy and safety profile as compared with 100 microg orally, but the oral route might be preferred by women. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the vaginal application of misoprostol for induction of labor at term, with the interval duration from labor induction to vaginal birth as the primary outcome measure.
                Two hundred twenty-two women with indications for induction of labor at term were randomized to receive either misoprostol 50 micrograms per vagina every 4 hours as needed or our standard approach (physician-chosen combinations of intracervical or vaginal dinoprostone every 6 hours, artificial rupture of membranes, and oxytocin infusion).
                Mean (+/-standard deviation) time to vaginal delivery was 753 +/- 588 minutes for misoprostol versus 941 +/- 506 minutes for the physician-chosen combination (P = .018). Oxytocin infusion was used less frequently (relative risk [RR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.74). There was no significant difference in cesarean rate or maternal morbidity. Neonatal outcomes, including cord-blood acid-base analysis, were not significantly different. The estimated cost per patient in Canadian dollars for prostaglandins was $0.22 with misoprostol and $70.00 with standard therapy.
                Vaginal misoprostol is a cost-effective alternative to current labor-induction protocols. We found no evidence of harm to mother or newborn in substantive outcomes. Various methods have been described for preoperative cervical priming prior to vacuum aspiration (VA) in first trimester pregnancy termination, to facilitate cervical dilatation and shorten the abortion procedure. Recently misoprostol a prostaglandin E1 analogue has been shown to be effective in facilitating cervical dilatation prior to VA. Misoprostol offers several advantages over the other prostagland in analogues including stability at room temperature, ease of administration and minimal side effects.
                To determine the optimal dosage and dosing interval for the use of misoprostol administered sublingually for pre-abortion cervical dilatation.
                This was a prospective randomised study conducted at Comprehensive Rural Health Project, Ballabgarh the rural health centre under Centre for Community Medicine, AIIMS, New Delhi.
                One hundred and twenty pregnant women between 6-11 weeks of gestation opting for voluntary medical termination of pregnancy were (MTP) randomly allocated to either 200 microg or the 400 microg misoprostol group. Vacuum aspiration was performed either two or three hours after administration of sublingual misoprostol. Using Hegar's dilators, degree of cervical dilatation before vacuum aspiration was measured. Other parameters assessed included the amount of additional dilatation required, intra-operative blood loss and associated side effects.
                Statistical analysis was conducted using chisquare, the student's t and the Mann-Whitney U tests to examine the difference between the two groups.
                In the 200 microg misoprostol group 33% achieved a dilatation of > or = 8 mm compared with 71% of women in the 400 microg misoprostol group. The odds ratio was 95.8 (95% CI 10.2-842.9) for 400 microg misoprostol for successful preoperative cervical dilatation of > or = 8 mm. The mean baseline cervical dilatation for 400 microg and 200 microg misoprostol was 8.2 mm and 6.0 mm respectively (P < 0.001). The use of 400 mg misoprostol with an evacuation interval of two hours appears to be the optimal dosage and evacuation interval. Increasing the time interval beyond two hours did not confer any additional advantage on the rate of successful cervical dilatation but was instead associated with an increased incidence of side effects such as preoperative vaginal bleeding, abdominal pain and shivering.
                Our study has shown that Sublingual administration of 400 microg of misoprostol at least two hours before procedure is effective for preoperative cervical dilatation before vacuum aspiration in first trimester pregnancy termination. There is no additional advantages of increasing the dosing interval upto three hours. To compare the efficacy of vaginal and oral misoprostol for the induction of labour in women with intra-uterine foetal death (IUFD).
                A prospective randomised clinical trial, comparing 200 microg oral and 200 microg vaginal misoprostol, six hourly for a maximum of four doses for the induction of labour in women with IUFD.
                Ga-Rankuwa hospital (Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology), Pretoria, South Africa. It is a tertiary institution serving predominantly black indigenous population.
                The primary outcome measure was the induction to delivery time, and secondary outcome measures were the number of patients requiring augmentation with oxytocin and all complications were noted.
                Twenty women were randomised to the vaginal route and 18 to the oral route. The induction to delivery time was shorter with vaginal misoprostol (13.5 +/- 8.3 hrs) compared to oral misoprostol (21.4 +/- 13.9 hrs; p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the amount of misoprostol needed to achieve successful induction in the two groups. More women (10/18) who received oral misoprostol required oxytocin augmentation to complete the induction of labour compared with 4/20 women in the vaginal group (p < 0.05; Odds Ratio 2.8; 95% Cl 1.36 - 4.24). There were no cases of failed induction. The systemic side effects (shivering, diarrhoea, vomiting and pyrexia) were more common with oral misoprostol (44.5%) compared to vaginal misoprostol (20%). This difference gives an overall Odds Ratio of 2.2 at 95% Cl of 1.6-2.8(p < 0.05).
                Vaginal misoprostol achieved successful induction of labour in women with IUFD in a shorter time than oral misoprostol with significantly less side effects. Our purpose was to compare the efficacy of 25 microg and 50 microg intravaginally administered misoprostol tablets for cervical ripening and labor induction. Either 25-microg (n: 58) or 50-microg (n: 56) misoprostol tablets were randomly administered intravaginally to 114 subjects with an unripe cervix for labor induction. The physician was blinded to the medication. Intravaginal misoprostol was given every 4 h until the onset of labor. The mean Bishop score before misoprostol administration was 2.1 +/- 1.6 in the 25-microg group and 2.0 +/- 1.4 in the 50-microg group (p > 0.05). With the 25-microg dose the time until delivery was significantly longer (991.2 +/- 514.4 min vs. 703.12 +/- 432.6 min in the 50-microg group). The use of oxytocin augmentation was significantly higher in the 25-microg group (63.8%) than the 50-microg group (32.1%; p < 0.05). The proportions of patients with tachysystoles and hypersystoles were not significantly different between the two groups (19 and 6.9%, respectively, in the 25-microg group and 25 and 17.8%, respectively, in 50-microg group; p > 0.05). Overall, in the 25-microg group more women achieved vaginal delivery (79.3 vs. 60.7%; p < 0.05). The rate of cesarean sections due to non-reassuring fetal status was higher in the 50-microg misoprostol group (28.6 vs. 10.3%; p < 0.05). The number of neonates with a low 1-min Apgar score (<7) was significantly higher in the 50-microg misoprostol group (26.8 vs. 8.6%; p < 0.05), but 5-min Apgar scores and umbilical artery blood gas values at the time of delivery were not significantly different between the groups (p > 0.05). One patient in the 25-microg group suffered a ruptured uterus. Intravaginal administration of 25 microg of misoprostol is a clinically effective labor induction regimen and has the least adverse effects and complications.
                Copyright 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel Our purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel (dinoprostone) for preinduction cervical ripening and induction of labor.
                Two hundred seventy-six patients with indications for induction of labor and unfavorable cervices were randomly assigned to receive either intravaginal misoprostol or intracervical dinoprostone. Twenty-five micrograms of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every 3 hours, with a potential maximum of eight doses. Prostaglandin E2 in gel form, 0.5 mg, was placed in the endocervix every 6 hours, with a maximum of three doses. Further medication was withheld with the occurrence of spontaneous rupture of membranes, entry into active phase of labor, or a "prolonged contraction response."
                Among those evaluated, 138 received misoprostol and 137 received dinoprostone. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was shorter in the misoprostol group (1323.0 +/- 844.4 minutes) than in the dinoprostone group (1532.4 +/- 706.5 minutes) (p < 0.05). Need for oxytocin augmentation of labor occurred more commonly in the dinoprostone group (72.6%) than in the misoprostol group (45.7%) (p < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in the routes of delivery. Twenty-eight of the misoprostol-treated patients (20.3%) and thirty-eight of the dinoprostone-treated patients (27.7%) required abdominal delivery. Complications such as uterine tachysystole and thick meconium passage occurred with similar frequency in the two treatment groups.
                Intravaginal administration of misoprostol appears to be as effective as intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Complications associated with prostaglandin administration were not statistically different between the two treatment groups. The cost of misoprostol ($0.36/100 micrograms) is much less than that of dinoprostone ($75/0.5 mg). A prospective randomised controlled trial was undertaken to compare the efficacy of two routes of administration, oral versus vaginal, of the prostaglandin E1 analogue misoprostol (Cytotec) to effect termination of pregnancy in the mid-trimester. Fifty-five women were recruited into the trial; 26 to receive all doses orally and 29 via the vaginal route. The dosing regimen was 400 microg as the initial dose followed by a second dose of 200 microg two hours later and then four-hourly 200 microg doses until delivery or 32 hours from commencement of treatment. If delivery had not been effected by the last dose of misoprostol, a Syntocinon infusion was started synchronously Misoprostol administered vaginally was significantly more effective than when administered orally as judged by induction-to-delivery interval and also the need or otherwise to augment therapy with a Syntocinon infusion. The average induction-to-delivery interval was 17.5 hours in the vaginal group compared to 33 hours in the oral group (p = 0.0003). The percentages of women who delivered at 24 and 48 hours were 93% and 100% in the vaginal administration group and 19% and 70% in the oral administration group (p < 0.05). No significant differences in complication rates or side effects were noted between the two groups To compare the effectiveness of 25 microg vs. 50 microg of intravaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction beyond 41 weeks' gestation.
                The study population consisted of 120 women not in active labor with a gestational age >41 weeks, singleton pregnancy with vertex presentation, reactive fetal heart rate tracing, amniotic fluid index >/=5, and Bishop score <5. Women were randomized to receive either 25 microg (n=60) or 50 microg (n=60) of intravaginal misoprostol. The dose was repeated every 4 h (maximum number of doses limited to six) until the patient exhibited three contractions in 10 min. The main outcome measure was the induction-vaginal delivery interval.
                There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to the induction-vaginal delivery interval (685+/-201 min in the 25 microg group vs. 627+/-177 min in the 50 microg group, P=0.09). The proportion of women delivering vaginally with one dose of vaginal misoprostol was significantly greater in the 50 microg group (0/49 vs. 41/47, P<0.001). There were no differences in the rates of cesarean and operative vaginal delivery rates, or in the incidences of tachysystole and hyperstimulation syndrome in the two treatment groups. Neonatal outcomes were also similar.
                Intravaginal administration of 25 microg of misoprostol appears to be as effective as 50 microg for cervical ripening and labor induction beyond 41 weeks' gestation. To compare the efficacy, side effects, and complications of high-dose vaginal misoprostol with concentrated intravenous oxytocin plus low-dose vaginal prostaglandin (PGE(2)) for second-trimester labor induction.
                One hundred twenty-six consenting women with maternal or fetal indications for pregnancy termination and no prior cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to receive either vaginal misoprostol 600 microg 1x, 400 microg every 4 hours 5x (misoprostol group, n = 60) or escalating-dose concentrated oxytocin infusions (277-1,667 mU/min) plus vaginal PGE(2) 10 mg every 6 hours 4x (oxytocin group, n = 66). Both groups received concurrent extra-amniotic saline infusion for cervical ripening. Women who failed their assigned regimen received 20 mg of PGE(2) suppositories every 4 hours until delivery. Analysis was by intent to treat.
                Demographic characteristics were similar between study groups. Median induction-to-delivery interval was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (12 hours) than in the oxytocin group (17 hours; P <.001). There was a higher induction success rate at 24 hours in the misoprostol group (95%) than in the oxytocin group (85%; P =.06), although this difference did not reach statistical significance. The incidence of live birth (25% versus 17%), chorioamnionitis (5% versus 2%), and postpartum hemorrhage greater than 500 mL (3% versus 3%) were similar between the misoprostol and oxytocin groups, respectively. Diarrhea (2% versus 11%; P =.04), nausea/emesis (25% versus 42%; P =.04), and retained placenta requiring curettage (2% versus 15%; P =.008) were significantly less common in the misoprostol group when compared with the oxytocin group, respectively. Isolated intrapartum fever, however, was more frequent in the misoprostol group (67%) than in the oxytocin group (21%; P <.001).
                Compared with concentrated oxytocin plus low-dose vaginal PGE(2), high-dose vaginal misoprostol is associated with significantly shorter induction-to-delivery intervals, fewer side effects, a lower incidence of retained placenta, and comparable incidence of live birth. The aim of this randomized controlled study was to compare the efficacy and the safety of different regimens of misoprostol for labor induction. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eligible women received intravaginal 100 microg, every 6 h or 50 microg every 4 h. Treatment continued until: (1) dilatation >3 cm; (2) rupture of membranes (artificial); (3) signs of uterine hyperstimulation; (4) adequate contraction pattern (three contraction/10 min). Managing clinician might use oxytocin during labor. Cesarean section rate was the main outcome that was considered variably. Other outcome measures were neonatal outcome (Apgar scores, meconium staining, and umbilical artery pH) and induction to delivery interval.
                A total number of 72 women received either misoprostol 100 microg (n=37), or 50 microg (n=35) randomly. The two groups had similar mean Bishops scores at induction (4.10+/-2.4 versus 4.2+/-2.1; P=0.85), rates of nulliparity, use of epidural anesthesia, and oxytocin augmentation. In two groups the number of doses of misoprostol used was similar (1.6+/-0.5 versus 1.7+/-0.3)
                There was not any difference between the two groups in the mean+/-S.D. time to delivery (h) and cesarean rate. Likewise, there was not a significance between two groups in the rates of 5 min Apgar score, and of meconium passage. The aim of this randomized study was to compare the effectiveness, safety, and side effects of 6 h vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) for labor induction.
                Fifty microgram of misoprostol was given intravaginally in the misoprostol group (204 women), and 3 mg PGE(2) was given intravaginally in the PGE(2) group (211 women). In both groups, the dose was repeated every 6 h for a maximum of three doses, until active labor was achieved. Artificial rupture of membranes and oxytocin infusion was used during labor in both groups where it was indicated.
                The mean interval from the institution of labor induction to delivery was 11.3 +/- 8.6 h for the misoprostol group, and 15.7 +/- 9.3 h for PGE(2 )group (P < 0.05). In the misoprostol group, oxytocin was used less frequently, but there was a higher prevalence of tachysystole. No statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups as regard abnormal patterns of fetal heart rate, the mode of delivery, and the need for neonatal intervention.
                In conclusion, the intravaginal administration of 50 mug misoprostol at 6 h interval (maximum three doses) is comparable in safety, but more effective for induction of labor than 3 mg intravaginal PGE(2). Misoprostol - a stable prostaglandin E1 analogue- is effective and safe in the induction of labour. There is paucity of information about the use of misoprostol for labour induction in Nigeria.
                To evaluate the efficacy of misoprostol in the induction of labour in the third trimester. METHODS. Consecutive patients for induction of labour were randomized into misoprostol or oxytocin study groups. The misoprostol group received intravaginal 50 microg 6- hourly to a maximum of four doses. Those in the oxytocin group received a maximum of 48 iu/min. Outcome measures included induction-delivery interval, mode of delivery, Apgar score, perinatal death and maternal complications.
                Sixty-two patients were recruited into the study-34 received misoprostol while 28 received oxytocin. The modal gestational age and Bishop score prior at induction were >36 weeks and 5-7 respectively. Hypertension in pregnancy was the commonest indication for induction of labour followed by prolonged pregnancy. The overall induction-delivery interval was 12.2 +/- 5.2 hours; Misoprostol v oxytocin, mean(range): 12.1(7-27) vs 12.3(4-27) hours, p = 0.88). There were no significant differences in the mean Apgar score and perinatal mortality rate in the two study groups. There were two cases of primary postpartum haemorrhage in the oxytocin group but none in the misoprostol group. One case of ruptured uterus was encountered in the misoprostol group. No case of maternal mortality was recorded. Four patients in the misoprostol group had minor side effects mainly nausea and vomiting.
                The efficacy of misoprostol in the induction of third trimester labour is comparable to oxytocin. The risk of ruptured uterus associated with misoprostol appears higher than that of oxytocin in the induction of labour. Further studies are needed to verify this observation in our setting. To compare oral misoprostol solution with vaginal prostaglandin gel (dinoprostone) for induction of labour at term to determine whether misoprostol is superior.
                Randomised double blind placebo controlled trial.
                Maternity departments in three hospitals in Australia. Population Pregnant women with a singleton cephalic presentation at > or = 36+6 weeks' gestation, with an indication for prostaglandin induction of labour.
                20 mug oral misoprostol solution at ourly intervals and placebo vaginal gel or vaginal dinoprostone gel at six hourly intervals and placebo oral solution.
                Vaginal birth within 24 hours; uterine hyperstimulation with associated changes in fetal heart rate; caesarean section (all); and caesarean section for fetal distress.
                741 women were randomised, 365 to the misoprostol group and 376 to the vaginal dinoprostone group. There were no significant differences between the two treatment groups in the primary outcomes: vaginal birth not achieved in 24 hours (misoprostol 168/365 (46.0%) v dinoprostone 155/376 (41.2%); relative risk 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.32; P = 0.134), caesarean section (83/365 (22.7%) v 100/376 (26.6%); 0.82, 0.64 to 1.06; P = 0.127), caesarean section for fetal distress (32/365 (8.8%) v 35/376 (9.3%); 0.91, 0.57 to 1.44; P = 0.679), or uterine hyperstimulation with changes in fetal heart rate (3/365 (0.8%) v 6/376 (1.6%); 0.55, 0.14 to 2.21; P = 0.401). Although there were differences in the process of labour induction, there were no significant differences in adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes.
                This trial shows no evidence that oral misoprostol is superior to vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labour. However, it does not lead to poorer health outcomes for women or their infants, and oral treatment is preferred by women.
                National Health and Medical Research Council, Perinatal Trials, PT0361. To evaluate the safety and clinical effectiveness of intravaginal misoprostol, a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analogue, for labor induction in gravidas with premature rupture of membranes (PROM) at term.
                One hundred forty-one pregnant women with term PROM were assigned randomly to one of two induction groups: 1) intravaginal misoprostol or 2) intravenous oxytocin by continuous infusion.
                Seventy subjects were allocated to the misoprostol group and 71 to the oxytocin group. The mean (+/- standard deviation) interval from induction to delivery was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (416 +/- 276 compared with 539 +/- 372 minutes; P = .04). In 85.7% of patients in the misoprostol group, only one dose was required. Intrapartum complication rates, mode of delivery, and neonatal or maternal adverse event rates were similar in the two treatment groups. Uterine tachysystole occurred more frequently with misoprostol than with oxytocin (28.6% compared with 14.0%; P < .04).
                Intravaginal administration of misoprostol induces labor safely and effectively in patients with PROM at term. To compare the efficacy and safety of 100 microg oral misoprostol for induction of labor between the regimen of 3 hour and 6 hour interval administration.
                Singleton pregnancies indicated for induction of labor between 34 and 42 weeks of gestation in the condition of unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 4) and no contraindication for prostaglandins therapy were recruited into the study. All pregnant women were randomly assigned to receive 100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours or 6 hours until the cervix was favorable for amniotomy, spontaneous rupture of membranes or active labor occurred.
                The mean time interval from induction to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the 3 hour interval group, compared with the 6 hour interval group (13.82 +/- 6.98h and 17.66 +/- 7.48h, P = 0.0019). There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to mode of delivery, analgesic requirement, maternal complication and neonatal outcome.
                100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours is more effective for labor induction than every 6 hours but there was no difference in mode of delivery, analgesic requirement, maternal complications and neonatal outcome. A dose of 100 microg misoprostol orally every 3 hours seems to be the optimum regimen and the new option for labor induction. However, further study should be performed. We compared the efficacy of misoprostol with that of prostaglandin E2 in cervical ripening and labour induction. Thus 238 women with rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation without labour were randomized to receive 50 microg misoprostol vaginal gel or 5 mg of prostaglandin E2 gel. Bishop score was evaluated before drug application and 6 hours later. Clinical data and perinatal outcome were recorded. Mean time from induction to delivery and the need for oxytocin were significantly less in the misoprostol group. There were no significant differences in spontaneous labour rate, type of delivery and perinatal outcome. It is concluded that intravaginal misoprostol is safe and more effective than prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening in premature rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation. Our purpose was to compare orally administered with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.
                Two hundred twenty subjects with medical or obstetric indications for labor induction and undilated, uneffaced cervices were randomly assigned to receive orally administered or vaginally administered misoprostol. Fifty micrograms of oral misoprostol or 25 microgram of vaginal misoprostol was given every 4 hours. If cervical ripening (Bishop score of >/=8 or cervical dilatation of >/=3) or active labor did not occur, repeated doses were given to a maximum of 6 doses or 24 hours. Thereafter, oxytocin was administered intravenously by a standardized incremental infusion protocol to a maximum of 22 mU/min.
                Of the 220 subjects evaluated, 110 received orally administered misoprostol and 110 received vaginally administered misoprostol. Fewer subjects who received the oral preparation (34/110, 30.9%) were delivered vaginally within 24 hours of initiation of induction, in comparison with those who received the vaginal preparation (52/110, 47.3%) (P =.01). The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was nearly 6 hours longer in the oral treatment group (mean and SD 1737.9 +/- 845.7 minutes) than in the vaginal treatment group (mean and SD 1393.2 +/- 767.9) (P =.005, log-transformed data). Orally treated patients required significantly more doses than vaginally treated patients (orally administered doses: mean and SD 3.3 +/- 1.7; vaginally administered doses: mean and SD 2.3 +/- 1.2) (P <.0001). Oxytocin administration was necessary in 83 (75.4%) of 110 orally treated subjects and in 65 (59.1%) of 110 vaginally treated subjects (P =.01, relative risk 1. 28, 95% confidence interval 1.06-1.54). Vaginal delivery occurred in 95 (86.4%) orally treated subjects and in 85 (77.3%) vaginally treated subjects (P =.08, relative risk 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.99-1.27), with the remainder undergoing cesarean delivery. There was no difference in the incidence of uterine contractile abnormalities (tachysystole, hypertonus, or hyperstimulation), intrapartum complications, or neonatal outcomes between the 2 groups.
                Oral administration of 50-microgram doses of misoprostol appears less effective than vaginal administration of 25-microgram doses of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Further investigation is needed to determine whether orally administered misoprostol should be used for cervical ripening and labor induction. To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability of sublingual misoprostol compared with an equivalent dose administered orally for labor induction at term.
                One hundred women with medical or obstetric indications for induction of labor after 37 weeks of gestation and unfavorable cervices were randomized to receive 50 microg of misoprostol either orally or sublingually. The dose was repeated every 4 hours to a maximum of 5 doses if indicated. Previous cesarean delivery was a criteria for exclusion. Our primary outcome measure was the number of patients who went on to have a vaginal delivery within 24 hours of the induction. The need for oxytocin, mode of delivery, number of cesarean deliveries for fetal distress, uterine hyperstimulation rates, and neonatal outcomes were secondary outcome measures. Patient acceptability was assessed by questionnaires completed after delivery.
                Significantly more patients were delivered of infants within 24 hours (73.8% versus 45.7%; relative risk, 1.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 2.4) and the induction to delivery intervals were significantly shorter (20 hours versus 28.3 hours; mean difference, 8.3 hours; 95% confidence interval, 1.2 to 15.4) in the sublingual group compared with the oral group. There was 1 case of uterine hyperstimulation in the sublingual group. There were no significant differences in the mode of delivery, interventions for fetal distress, or neonatal outcomes in the 2 groups. The satisfaction rates were 82.5% and 85.7% in the oral and sublingual groups respectively, and 9.5% of patients thought that the sublingual tablets did not dissolve completely.
                There has been no previous report in the literature of misoprostol given sublingually for labor induction. Sublingual misoprostol seems to have better efficacy than oral misoprostol, seems to be acceptable to patients, and is an option to be considered to induce labor at term. To compare the active management of term prelabour rupture of membranes with oral misoprostol with conservative management for 24 hours followed by induction with oxytocin or prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) gel.
                A non-blinded randomised controlled trial.
                Induction and labour wards, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital.
                Sixty-one women with confirmed prelabour rupture of the membranes at > or =36 weeks of gestation.
                The women were randomised to 50 microg of oral misoprostol repeated every 4 hours, if required, to a maximum of five doses (active group), or to induction of labour with PGE(2) gel or oxytocin only if not in spontaneous labour 24 hours after prelabour rupture of membranes (conservative group).
                Number of women in active labour within 24 hours of the prelabour rupture of membranes, preference of women for any one particular method of management in any subsequent pregnancy with prelabour rupture of membranes.
                93.3% of the active group and 54.8% of the conservative group were in spontaneous labour within 24 hours of the prelabour rupture of membranes (RR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.4). Of those achieving a vaginal delivery, 72% of the active group did so within 24 hours of the prelabour rupture of membranes as compared with 26.9% of the conservative group (RR 2.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 5.3, P = 0.002). There were no significant differences in the neonatal or maternal outcomes. In the active group, 78% felt they would have the same method of induction as compared with 40% in the conservative group (RR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.3, P = 0.03).
                Active management with oral misoprostol resulted in more women going into labour and delivering within 24 hours of the prelabour rupture of membranes with no increase in maternal or neonatal complications. Women tended to view active management of prelabour rupture of membranes more positively. Oral misoprostol might be an option to consider in those wishing active management. Intrauterine fetal death is a major problem in obstetrics particularly in developing countries such as Uganda. Induction of labour in cases of fetal death using the available method of oxytocin is often difficult, expensive and frustrating.
                To compare the effectiveness of vaginal misoprostol and intravenous oxytocin in induction of labour in women with intrauterine fetal death.
                One hundred and twenty mothers were allocated in a randomised controlled way to one of the two induction groups. Oxytocin infusion was titrated based on patient response. The starting dose was 50 mcg (1/4 tablet) in misoprostol group and the dose was doubled every six hours till effective contractions were achieved. The two groups were compared for induction to delivery intervals, costs of the drugs and their safety during induction.
                The success rate within 48 hours of induction was 100% in the misoprostol group and 96.7% in oxytocin group. The mean induction to delivery time was significantly longer in the oxytocin group compared with the misoprostol group (23.3 versus 12.4 hours; p= 0.004). In the gestational age before 28 weeks, the induction to delivery interval in oxytocin group, was more than twice that used in misoprostol. However beyond 28 weeks, there was no significant difference. Women with intact membranes had induction to delivery interval of 27.9 hours in the oxytocin group and 14.7 hours in the misoprostol group (p=0.002). When the membranes were ruptured, the values were 10.5 and 8.5 hours respectively (p=0.6). The induction to delivery time in cases with Bishop's score < 6 was 29.8 hours in the oxytocin group and 15.9 hours in misoprostol group (p=0.001). The corresponding values for Bishop's scores > 6 were 10 and 7.9 hours respectively (p=0.6). The majority of patients in misoprostol group (62%), required less than one tablet for successful induction. Misoprostol was cheaper (0.65 US dollars than oxytocin (7.86 US dollars) Retained placenta occurred in only 3.3% of the patients in the misoprostol group. There were no cases of ruptured uterus in both groups.
                Intravaginal misoprostol is more effective and cheaper than intravenous oxytocin for inducing labour in patients with intrauterine fetal death. To compare the efficacy of a vaginal insert administering continuous dinoprostone with vaginal suppositories containing two different doses of misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor.
                In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 118 patients with indications for induction of labor and an unfavorable Bishop score were randomly assigned to receive either continuous dinoprostone, misoprostol 35-microg suppositories, or misoprostol 50-microg suppositories.
                No significant differences were noted among the three groups in the change of Bishop score, induction of active labor or the time from initial treatment to delivery. Active labor occurred in roughly two-thirds of the patients in an average of about 5.7-6.7 h regardless of treatment assignment. When the two misoprostol groups were combined, a shorter interval from insertion to vaginal delivery was observed in the nulliparous women receiving misoprostol than those receiving continuous dinoprostone (21.3 vs. 27.2 h, p = 0.019). Except for the significantly lower incidence of tachysystole observed in the combined misoprostol group (3.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.036), there were no other significant differences between the groups in mode of delivery or in adverse maternal, fetal, or neonatal effects.
                Misoprostol suppositories appeared to be as effective and safe as continuous dinoprostone in inducing cervical ripening in this sample. Our purpose was to compare the efficacy of oral misoprostol with that of vaginal misoprostol for midtrimester termination of pregnancy.
                Women seen for midtrimester pregnancy termination were randomly assigned to receive either misoprostol orally in a dose of 200 microg every hour for 3 hours followed by 400 microg every 4 hours or vaginally in a dose of 400 microg every 4 hours. The protocol was followed for 24 hours, after which time further management was at the discretion of the attending physician. The primary outcome measure was the induction-to-delivery interval. Sample size was calculated a priori. Statistical analysis was performed with the t test for continuous variables and the chi(2) test for categorical variables. P <.05 was considered significant.
                One hundred fourteen women were randomized, with 49 receiving vaginal misoprostol and 65 receiving oral misoprostol. The two groups were comparable with respect to maternal age, parity, indication for pregnancy termination, gestational age, and maternal weight. The mean induction-to-delivery interval was significantly shorter for the vaginal group (19.6 +/- 17.5 hours vs 34.5 +/- 28.2 hours, P <.01). Length of stay was also shorter in the vaginal group (32.3 +/- 17.3 hours vs 50.9 +/- 27.9 hours, P <.01). Significantly more patients in the vaginal group were delivered within 24 hours (85.1% vs 39.5%, P <.01), and more patients in the oral group required changes in the method of induction when they were undelivered after 24 hours (38.2% vs 7%, P <.01). The only complication was an increase in febrile morbidity in the vaginal group (25% vs 6.7%, P =.046). This did not result in an increased use of antibiotics, and all the fevers resolved post partum without further complications.
                Vaginal administration of misoprostol resulted in a shorter induction-to-delivery interval. The shorter length of stay should result in improved patient care. To compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol gel with that of tablets for ripening the cervix and inducing labor in women with unfavorable cervices.
                Four hundred sixty-seven gravidas were randomized to receive misoprostol tablets (n = 234) or misoprostol gel (n = 233). The gel was prepared in the antepartum unit immediately before use by dissolving the tablet in 1 mL normal saline and mixing with 4 mL hydroxyethylcellulose gel. In both groups, a 50-microgram dose was applied intravaginally every 8 hours for two doses, then increased to 100-microgram for a total of six applications or 500 micrograms.
                The mean interval in hours from drug administration to start induction or labor (13.8 versus 18.2) and delivery (22.4 versus 29.0) was significantly less in the tablet group than in the gel group (P < .01 for both). Oxytocin and epidural use and the mean number of misoprostol insertions (1.4 versus 1.9) were lower in the tablet group than in the gel group (P < .05 for all). The incidences of tachysystole (13.7 versus 7.3%) and hyperstimulation (15.8 versus 7.7%) were significantly higher in the tablet group than in the gel group. Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal outcomes were similar between the groups.
                Intravaginal misoprostol gel is associated with fewer uterine contractile abnormalities than the tablet form of the drug but results in a slower time to labor or delivery. 251 women with indications for labor induction at term were randomised to receive either 50 or 100 microgs of oral misoprostol, repeated every 4 h to a maximum of 5 doses. Parous women in the higher dose group received 50 microgs as their first dose, subsequent doses being 100 microgs. Women who failed to respond to the 5 doses of misoprostol had the option of having vaginal PGE2 gel. The primary outcome measure was the induction to delivery interval in those who delivered vaginally. Patient satisfaction was assessed by postnatal questionnaire.
                The induction to vaginal delivery interval, although shorter in the 100 microgs group was not statistically significant (26.8 versus 33.7 h, mean difference 6.9 h, 95% CI 0.4-13). There were, however, more failed inductions with misoprostol in the 50 microgs group (12.7% Vs 4.8%, RR 2.6, 95% CI 1.07-6.5). There were no differences in the modes of delivery, number of caesarean sections for fetal distress or in the neonatal outcomes in the two groups. Most patients, 83% and 92% in the 50 and 100 microgs, respectively, were satisfied with their inductions, and 64% of patients would prefer to have the inducing agent given orally if they were to have another induction.
                Oral misoprostol is effective in inducing labor and seems acceptable to patients. Both the 50 and 100 microgs dose regimens have a reasonable safety profile, but in view of the higher incidence of failed inductions with the 50 microgs dosage, the 100 microgs dose regimen may be the preferred dose regimen. The purpose of this study was to compare orally administered misoprostol with intravenous oxytocin infusion for labor induction in women with favorable cervical examinations (defined as a Bishop score of 6 or more).
                One hundred ninety-eight women with indications for labor induction and favorable cervical examinations were assigned randomly to receive oral misoprostol or oxytocin induction. Misoprostol, 100 mg, was administered every 4 hours up to 6 doses, or intravenous oxytocin was administered by standardized protocol.
                One hundred ten (55.6%) women received misoprostol; 88 (44.4%) received intravenous oxytocin. There was no statistically significant difference in the average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery, being longer in the misoprostol group (789.4 +/- 510.2 minutes) than in the oxytocin group (654.0 +/- 338.2 minutes, P=.19, log-transformed data). Two women had tachysystole develop in each treatment group. More women in the misoprostol group experienced hyperstimulation (7/110, 6.4%) than in the oxytocin group (0/88, P=.02, Fisher exact test). Nine (8.1%) misoprostol-treated women and 8 (9.1%) oxytocin-treated women underwent cesarean deliveries (P=.82). There was a presumed uterine rupture in a misoprostol-treated multipara women. There were no statistically significant differences in neonatal outcomes between the groups.
                Oral misoprostol offers no benefit over intravenous oxytocin for labor induction in women with favorable cervical examinations. It is associated with a higher likelihood of uterine hyperstimulation and may increase the risk of uterine rupture. To assess the effectiveness and safety of the administration of misoprostol, an orally active prostaglandin, in addition to routine uterotonic therapy as part of the active management of the third stage of labor.
                The present study was a hospital-based, decentralized, multi-center, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. We enrolled 1103 women (out of a target sample size of 1180) at 4 hospitals in South Africa, Uganda, and Nigeria. Participants received a sublingual dose of 400 μg of misoprostol or a placebo, in addition to standard active management of the third stage of labor, after vaginal birth.
                The baseline characteristics of the participants were comparable. The difference in the primary outcome of blood loss of 500 mL or more within 1 hour of randomization was not significant between the 2 groups (misoprostol 22/546 [4.0%] versus placebo 35/553 [6.3%]; relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-1.07). Shivering and pyrexia occurred more frequently in the misoprostol group. No maternal deaths occurred.
                The present study did not confirm a beneficial effect of administering 400 μg of misoprostol, in addition to routine uterotonic therapy, during the third stage of labor, but was consistent with other trials showing a cumulative modest benefit. Where routine uterotonics are available for prophylactic use, any potential benefit of misoprostol might not outweigh the likelihood of adverse effects.
                Copyright © 2010 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. The aim of this randomized trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol and oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with premature rupture of membrane (PROM) at term.
                Ninety-seven women with PROM at term were assigned randomly to receive intravaginal misoprostol or oxytocin. The primary outcome measure was the induction-delivery interval. Secondary outcomes included the number of women who delivered vaginally within 12 hours of the start of the induction in the two groups, the cesarean, hyperstimulation, and failed induction rates, the mode of delivery, and the neonatal outcome.
                Forty-eight women were assigned to intravaginal misoprostol and 49 to oxytocin administration. The mean interval from induction to delivery was 10.61 +/- 2.45 hours in the misoprostol group and 11.57 +/- 1.91 hours in the oxytocin group (p = 0.063). The rates of vaginal delivery were 83.3% and 87.7% and cesarean delivery were 16.7% and 8.2% in the misoprostol and oxytocin groups, respectively. Neonatal outcomes were not significantly different. Of the cases, 8.3% in the misoprostol group and 8.2% in the oxytocin group revealed uterine contraction abnormalities.
                Our study demonstrates that, intravaginally, misoprostol results in a similar interval from induction of labor to delivery when compared to oxytocin. To compare the efficacy and complications of intravaginal misoprostol application with oxytocin infusion for induction of labor in great grandmultiparous pregnancies with a Bishop score of <6.
                Sixty-four great grandmultiparous (delivering the tenth, or greater, infant) pregnant patients with a Bishop score of <6 were randomized in two groups with 32 patients receiving 50 microg intravaginal misoprostol four times with 4h intervals, and 32 patients receiving oxytocin infusion for induction of labor starting from 2 mIU/min, increasing it every 30 min with 2 mIU/min increments up to maximum of 40 mIU/min. The time from induction to delivery, the route of delivery, fetal outcome and maternal complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U-test, Chi-Square test and hypothesis test about differences for two proportions (t-test) to determine differences between the two groups. P < or = 0.05 was considered significant.
                The mean time from induction to delivery was 9.91+/-4.30 and 10.88+/-4.72 h in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups. The rate of vaginal delivery was 84.4 and 87.5% in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group, respectively, with no significant difference between the groups (P = 0.72). The rates of placental abruption and postpartum hemorrhage were similar in both groups and no case of uterine rupture occurred. The 1 and 5 min mean Apgar scores were 6.91+/-1.57-8.88+/-1.39 and 7.22+/-1.24-9.06+/-0.84 in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group with no significant differences between the groups (P = 0.38 and 0.51). No case of asphyxia was present. The rate of admission to neonatal intensive care unit was higher in the misoprostol administered group, but the difference was not significant.
                Intravaginal misoprostol is an alternative method to oxytocin in induction of labor in great grandmultiparous pregnant women with low Bishop scores, as it is effective, cheap and easy to use. Safety about rare complications and neonatal morbidity needs clarifications with further studies. To compare effectiveness and safety of 25 microg vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter and oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in pregnant women with unripe cervices.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                A public maternity in Recife, Brazil.
                A total of 240 pregnant women.
                Women with a term or post-term, live, singleton fetus in cephalic presentation, intact membranes, Bishop score <6, not in labor, medically indicated for labor induction. They were randomly divided in Group 1, where 119 women received 25 microg of intravaginal misoprostol every 6 hours for a maximum of four doses; and Group 2, where 121 women had a 14-F Foley catheter inserted into their cervical canal. Once past the internal os, the balloon was inflated. Intravenous oxytocin was initiated after the balloon was spontaneously extruded from the cervix or after 24 hours.
                There were no significant differences between the groups regarding baseline characteristics. Misoprostol was more effective in inducing labor than Foley catheter and oxytocin. Mean induction-to-vaginal delivery time with misoprostol was shorter (17.3 vs. 20.2 hours, p = 0.016). There were more vaginal deliveries in the misoprostol group at 12 (p < 0.001) and 18 (p = 0.007) hours, but the difference was no longer statistically significant at 24 and 48 hours. There were no significant differences in uterine contraction abnormalities, puerperal infection or neonatal outcomes.
                Vaginal misoprostol is more effective than and as safe as Foley catheter and oxytocin for induction of labor in term and post-term pregnancy. To compare the efficacy and complications of intravaginal misoprostol application with oxytocin infusion for induction of labor in toxemia of pregnancy with a modified Bishop score of < or =4.
                A hundred preeclamptic women with a modified Bishop score of < or =4 were randomized into two groups of 50 patients one group receiving 50 microg intravaginal misoprostol 4 times at 4 hour intervals, the second group receiving oxytocin infusion for induction of labor starting from 1 mIU/per minute, increasing it every 30 minutes with 2 mIU/per minute increments up to maximum of 30 mIU/per minute. Modified Bishop scores 12 hours after induction, the time from induction to delivery, the route of delivery, fetal outcome and maternal complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann Whitney-U, Chi-Square and hypothesis tests about differences for two proportions (t test) to determine differences between the two groups. p< or =0.05 was considered significant.
                Misoprostol was significantly superior for induction of labor in toxemia of pregnancy with modified Bishop score of < or =4. After 12 hours median modified Bishop scores of misoprostol administered group and oxytocin administered group were 7 and 4 respectively. Misoprostol administered group 1 was significantly better than oxytocin administered group 2 (p=0.027). The rate of patients who were in labor after 12 hours were 94% and 80% in group 1 and 2 respectively and the difference showed significant difference (p<0.05). The median time from induction to delivery was 14 hours and 16 hours in the misoprostol and oxytocin administered group respectively with significant difference between the groups (p=0.003). The rate of vaginal delivery was significantly higher in the misoprostol administered group 1 (82%) when compared with the oxytocin administered group 2 (66%) (p<0.05). The 1 and 5 minutes median Apgar scores were 5-7 and 6-7.5 in group 1 and 2, respectively with no significant differences between the groups (p=0.96, p=0.64). The rate of admission to neonatal intensive care unit was similar in both groups. The complication rates were similar in all groups and no significant detrimental effects were noted.
                Intravaginal misoprostol is an efficacious, cheap and safe method of induction of labor in toxemia of pregnancy with modified Bishop score of < or =4. To compare the safety, efficacy, and costs of intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal inserts for cervical ripening and labor induction.
                Two hundred twenty-three labor induction patients were assigned randomly to one of two treatment groups: 1) intravaginal misoprostol or 2) dinoprostone vaginal inserts. Fifty micrograms of misoprostol were placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every 3 hours for a maximum period of 24 hours. Ten milligrams of dinoprostone was administered in a single application as a vaginal insert for 12 hours.
                Among 223 patients evaluated, 108 were allocated to the misoprostol group and 115 to the dinoprostone group. The median interval from induction to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group: 698 (range 395-1053) versus 1041 (range 792-1531) minutes (P < .001). Vaginal delivery within 12 hours of ripening occurred in 40.7% of patients who received misoprostol compared with 19.1% for those receiving dinoprostone (P < .001); no significant difference between the groups was noted for vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Uterine tachysystole occurred more frequently in patients in the misoprostol group (21.3%) than in the dinoprostone group (7.0%) (P = .004). Nevertheless, no statistically significant differences were noted between the groups with respect to intrapartum complications, including uterine hyperstimulation, mode of delivery, and neonatal or maternal adverse outcomes. The average cost per patient for misoprostol treatment was $85 compared with $606 for treatment with the vaginal insert.
                Intravaginal misoprostol and the dinoprostone vaginal insert appear to be safe agents for cervical ripening and labor induction. However, misoprostol is less expensive and more effective than the dinoprostone vaginal insert. To compare the effectiveness and safety between intravaginal and oral misoprostol for labor induction.
                One hundred and six pregnant women at term with unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 4) and no contraindication to prostaglandin therapy were randomized to receive either intravaginal misoprostol 50 microg every 4 h or oral misoprostol 50 microg every 4 h for prospective randomized controlled trial study. Treatment interval from induction to vaginal delivery, maternal and neonatal complications were the main outcome measures.
                There were no statistical differences of baseline characteristics and Bishop score prior to intervention between both groups. Time interval from induction to vaginal delivery in the oral group was slightly, but significantly, longer than that of the intravaginal group (886.1 +/- 443.5 min vs 637.0 +/- 373.3 min, respectively.) Additionally, the number of doses required was significantly higher in the oral group. Nonetheless, there was no significant difference between both groups with regard to failure of induction and maternal-neonatal complications.
                The effectiveness in terms of failed induction and safety were comparable between intravaginal and oral misoprostol, but intravaginal route was better with respect to treatment interval and number of required doses. Both routes of administration can alternatively be used for labor induction. To determine if oral misoprostol can replace oxytocin for labor stimulation in women with ruptured membranes at term and without evidence of labor.
                Nulliparous women at 36 to 41 weeks with a singleton, cephalic-presenting fetus and ruptured membranes without evidence of labor were randomized to receive oral misoprostol (100 microg) or a placebo every 4 hours for a maximum of two doses. Intravenous oxytocin was initiated if active labor had not ensued within 8 hours of the initial study drug dose.
                Fifty-one women were randomized to oral misoprostol and 51 women to the placebo. Misoprostol reduced the use of oxytocin stimulation of labor from 90% to 37% (P <.001) and was associated with approximately a 7-hour shorter elapsed time in the labor unit. Uterine hyperactivity, defined as six or more contractions in 10 minutes without fetal heart rate decelerations, occurred in 25% of women randomized to misoprostol. However, uterine hyperactivity associated with fetal heart rate decelerations occurred in only three (6%) women, none of whom required emergency cesarean delivery. Route of delivery and infant outcomes were not related to misoprostol use.
                Oral misoprostol (100 microg) given in a maximum of two doses 4 hours apart significantly reduced the use of oxytocin in the management of women with ruptured membranes without labor at term. To compare the efficacy and safety of a 25-microgram vaginal tablet of misoprostol (APL202) with dinoprostone (3-mg vaginal tablet) in cervical ripening and labour induction.
                A randomised, open-label, noninferiority, comparative study in two maternal populations.
                Eighteen NHS study centres across the UK.
                Nulliparous or multiparous women with a singleton pregnancy eligible for induction of labour.
                Women were randomised to receive either misoprostol, initially 25 micrograms (50 micrograms in nulliparous women with Bishop score < or =4) followed by 25 micrograms after 4 and 8 hours, or dinoprostone, initially 3 mg followed by 3 mg after 6 hours. Clinical noninferiority of misoprostol was defined as an absolute difference between treatments of no more than 10% for the primary outcome.
                The number of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours of labour induction. Maternal and fetal safety outcomes.
                A total of 626 women were randomised to misoprostol (n = 318) or dinoprostone (n = 308) treatment. The rate of vaginal deliveries achieved within 24 hours of induction did not significantly differ between the misoprostol and dinoprostone (43 versus 47%; 3.74% difference, 95% CI -3.58 to 11.05, respectively) treatment groups. The treatments were generally comparable for other secondary efficacy measures. Maternal and fetal adverse events were similarly distributed across the misoprostol and dinoprostone groups.
                Low-dose misoprostol is efficacious in cervical ripening and labour induction and demonstrates a similar fetal and maternal safety profile to dinoprostone. Prospective clinical trials were conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of 6-hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for induction of labor.
                A total of 120 pregnant women requiring induction of labor were recruited. Cases were randomized to receive either 50 microg vaginal misoprostol 6 hourly (group 1, n = 60) or 0.5 mg intracervical dinoprostone 6 hourly (group II, n = 60). Outcome measures, such as change in Bishop's score, need of oxytocin, induction delivery interval; complications like tachysystoly, hyperstimulation, abnormal fetal heart rate, and meconium passage were compared between two groups. Statistical analysis was performed by Wilcoxan's Rank sum and Student's t-test.
                Bishop score rise, after 6 h of initiation of therapy was significantly higher in the misoprostol group than dinoprostone, 2.98 +/- 2.57 versus 2.05 +/- 1.83 (P = 0.04). The need of oxytocin augmentation was reduced in misoprostol versus dinoprostone group, 16.6% versus 78.3% (P = <0.001). Induction delivery interval was shorter in misoprostol; 12.8 +/- 6.4 h versus 18.53 +/- 8.5 h in dinoprostone group (P = <0.01). One case (1.6%) in misoprostol group, but none in dinoprostone had tachystole (P = 1.00). Abnormal heart rate pattern was found more in misoprostol than dinoprostone 16.6% versus 4.9% (P = 0.14) and so was the incidence of cesarean section, 26.6 versus 15%, respectively (P = 0.47). Meconium passage was the same in both groups, 10% in each group.
                Vaginal misoprostol 50 microg 6-hourly is safe and effective for induction of labor with lesser need of oxytocin augmentation and shorter induction delivery interval. Misoprostol is effective for cervical priming prior to vacuum aspiration for first trimester termination of pregnancy. Previous studies showed that the oral route was more acceptable to patients but there were higher incidences of side-effects when compared with the vaginal route. This study is to determine the optimal dosage and route of administration of misoprostol for pre-operative cervical dilatation. A double-blind, randomized trial was undertaken for 225 nulliparous women with 8-12 weeks amenorrhoea. They were randomly assigned to groups given 0 (placebo), 200 or 400 microg oral or vaginal misoprostol 3 h prior to vacuum aspiration. In misoprostol-treated groups the baseline cervical dilatation was significantly increased when compared with the placebo group; the effect was dose-related in the oral but not in the vaginal group. The cumulative force and blood loss was significantly decreased in the misoprostol-treated groups. The incidences of side-effects were more frequent in misoprostol groups but were not related to the route and dosage of medication. The duration of procedure, incidences of post-operative complications, the duration of post-operative bleeding and the interval to the first period were similar in the five treatment groups. We conclude that a 3 h pre-treatment interval is effective for both oral and vaginal routes. When given orally, 400 microg is more effective than 200 microg. The efficacy was otherwise similar when compared with the vaginal route. We recommend 400 microg oral misoprostol 3 h prior to vacuum aspiration for cervical dilatation. To compare the clinical efficacy and side effects of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol for second-trimester pregnancy termination.
                A randomized clinical trial of medical pregnancy termination between 14 and 26 weeks' gestation was conducted. Three misoprostol regimens were compared: 400 microg vaginally at 6-hour intervals (group 1), 400 microg orally at 3-hour intervals (group 2), and a loading dose of 600 microg vaginally followed by 200 microg orally at 3-hour intervals (group 3). A sample size of 225 women was required for equivalence of the three regimens, with an interim safety analysis planned at 80 women.
                A significant difference between the groups was evident at the interim safety analysis and the study ceased. The subset of 84 women recruited before the study closure is described. There was a significant difference in the median time to achieve delivery among the three groups: group 1, 14.5 hours (95% confidence interval 12.0, 16.9), versus group 2, 25.5 hours (13.5, 23.8), versus group 3, 16.4 hours (interquartile range 14.2-37.3) (P =.042). Within 24 hours of commencement 85.7% of women in group 1, 44.8% in group 2, and 74.1% in group 3 delivered (P =.003). At 48 hours 0% in group 1, 20.7% in group 2, and 3.7% in group 3 were undelivered (P =.011). There was no difference in women's perceptions of the termination process.
                In second-trimester pregnancy termination, a vaginal misoprostol regimen of 400 microg every 6 hours was 1.9 times more likely to result in delivery within 24 hours from commencement than an oral regimen of 400 microg every 3 hours. A randomised prospective trial was carried out to compare the efficacy and safety of intravaginal Misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone gel for induction of labour in cases of unfavourable cervix. One hundred women with an unfavourable cervix requiring induction of labour were randomised to receive either 25 microm vaginal Misoprostol 4-hourly or 0.5 mg of intracervical dinoprostone 12 hourly. The outcome measured was change in Bishop's score, percentage of women going into labour, induction to delivery interval, need for oxytocin, mode of delivery and complications. The parity, mean period of gestation and Bishop's score were similar in both the groups. The improvement in Bishop's score at 12 h was significantly better in the Misoprostol group. Induction to delivery interval was shorter in the Misoprostol group, 16.59 +/- 5.13 h vs 27.77 +/- 12.71 h. The rate of complications was comparable. Vaginal Misoprostol 25 microg 4-hourly is safe and effective for induction of labour with shorter induction to delivery interval. Our purpose was to compare the efficacy 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms dosage of intravaginal misoprostol for labor induction in patients with an unfavorable cervix. Fifty pregnant women were randomly assigned to receive either 25 micrograms (24 cases) or 50 micrograms (26 cases) of intravaginal misoprostol every 6 hours. The mean interval from induction to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the 50 micrograms group (13.8 +/- 6.6 hours) when compared with the 25 micrograms group (20.9 +/- 9.5 hours) (P = 004). The average number of misoprostol doses needed per patient was significantly fewer in the 50 micrograms group (1.6 +/- 0.7 versus 2.3 +/- 1.2, P = 0.018). The frequencies of uterine tachysystole were 4.2 per cent and 7.7 per cent in the 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms groups respectively which did not significantly differ. Requirement for oxytocin infusion in the 25 micrograms group was significantly more than in the 50 micrograms group (66.6% versus 23.1% respectively, P = 0.004). Analgesia requirement, delivery method, and perinatal outcomes were comparable in both groups. In summary, intravaginal application of 50 micrograms misoprostol at 6-hour interval is comparable in safety but more effective for labor induction than the 25 micrograms dosage. Misoprostol, a synthetic E1 methyl analog prostaglandin, is at present receiving attention as a cervical modifier and labor induction agent. However, there is still a need for better determination of its safety and effectiveness.
                To compare intravaginal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in pregnant women with unripe cervices.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                The study was performed at the Leonor Mendes de Barros Maternity Hospital between November 1998 and December 2000.
                210 pregnant women with intact membranes and indication for labor induction were selected.
                The women randomly received 25 g of vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours, not exceeding 8 doses (105 women), or oxytocin in a continuous infusion (105 women).
                The main parameters measured were: latent period, time from induction to vaginal delivery, delivery route, occurrence of vaginal delivery with time, occurrence of uterine tonus alterations, hypoxia and neonatal morbidity. To verify the statistical significance of the differences between the groups, the chi-squared, Student t and log-rank tests were used.
                There were no significant differences between the groups concerning conditions for labor induction, age, parity, race, marital status, family income, initial Bishop Index and number of prenatal visits. The cesarean section rate, latent period and period from induction to vaginal delivery were significantly lower for the misoprostol group. With regard to uterine tonus alterations, tachysystole was significantly more common in the misoprostol group. However, there was no difference in hypoxia and neonatal morbidity between the groups.
                25 g of misoprostol used vaginally every 4 hours is safer and more efficient for cervical ripening and labor induction than oxytocin. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral misoprostol for labor induction in women with term premature rupture of membranes (PROM) and an unfavorable cervix.
                We randomized 130 women with PROM of < or =4 h to either oral misoprostol, 50 microg, or a placebo given every 4 h for up to three doses. Intravenous oxytocin was initiated if active labor did not begin within 12 h.
                Sixty-four women received oral misoprostol and 66 received placebo. The PROM-to-delivery interval was shorter with misoprostol than with placebo (13.7+/-5.8 vs. 20.3+/-6.8 h, respectively, P<0.05). Misoprostol significantly reduced the need for oxytocin (28.1 vs. 72.7%, P<0.001) and antibiotics (25 vs. 69.7%, P<0.001). No significant differences in cesarean section or hyperstimulation rate were noted.
                Oral misoprostol given to women with unfavorable cervix soon after term PROM significantly reduces the induction-to-delivery time and the need for oxytocin and antibiotics. To compare the efficacy of two different dosages of oral misoprostol (50 and 100 microg) with control, in medical induction of labor for patients with prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) at term.
                One hundred women with PROM at term were randomized to receive placebo (vitamin B6 50 mg, control), 50 microg (treatment group 1), or 100 microg (treatment group 2) of oral misoprostol every 4 h to a maximum of six doses. The main outcome measures included time interval from onset of PROM to delivery, duration of first stage of labor, and occurrence of vaginal delivery within 24 h from PROM.
                The time intervals from PROM to delivery were significantly reduced in both treatment groups compared to control (control, 25.1+/-10.5 h; treatment group 1, 14.5+/-6.2 h; and treatment group 2, 13.0+/-6.1 h, p<0.0001 for both). The duration of the first stage of labor was significantly shortened only in treatment group 2 compared to control (3.3+/-2.5 versus 6.2+/-3.4 h, p=0.01). Of those who delivered vaginally (93% in treatment group 1 and 97% in treatment group 2), significantly more women delivered within 24 h of PROM in the treatment group compared to the control group (50%, p<0.05).
                Oral misoprostol 50 microg every 4 h is safe, cheap, and as effective as 100 microg in reducing the PROM to delivery time interval and labor duration in primiparous women. The same effect is not observed in a multiparous group. Our purpose was to compare the efficacy and safety of misoprostol with dinoprostone (Prepidil) for labor induction.
                In a randomized, controlled trial of labor induction, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 50 microgram of intravaginal misoprostol every 4 hours or 0.5 mg of intracervical prostaglandin E2 every 6 hours. Eligibility criteria included gestation of >/=31 weeks, Bishop score <6, and fewer than 12 contractions per hour. Primary outcomes were cesarean section, induction to delivery time, oxytocin use, and fetal distress requiring delivery.
                One hundred fifty-nine women were randomly assigned to receive misoprostol (n = 81) or Prepidil (n = 78). There were no differences in the indication for induction, preinduction Bishop score, epidural use, or cesarean section rate. Mean time to delivery was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (19 hours 50 minutes) than in the Prepidil group (28 hours 52 minutes) (P =.005). Only 58% of women in the misoprostol group required oxytocin augmentation, in comparison with 88% of women receiving Prepidil (P =.00002). However, 41% of women receiving misoprostol and 17% receiving Prepidil had late decelerations or bradycardias (P =.001), and 20% of the misoprostol group and 5% of the Prepidil group had deliveries for fetal distress (P =.05).
                Misoprostol is more efficacious than Prepidil for labor induction. However, the significantly increased incidence of abnormal fetal heart rate tracings and the trend in increased deliveries for fetal distress with misoprostol dosing of 50 microgram every 4 hours are of concern. These data suggest that either a lower dose of misoprostol or less frequent dosing of misoprostol should be considered. To determine the optimal evacuation time interval in the use of vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming before first trimester termination of pregnancy.
                Prospective double-blind randomised study.
                Fertility Control Centre, National University Hospital, Singapore.
                Sixty healthy nulliparous women requesting legal termination of pregnancy between 6 and 11 weeks of gestation were randomly allocated to either the 400 microg or 600 microg misoprostol group. Vacuum aspiration was performed after three hours in the 400 microg group and at the end of two hours in the women given 600 microg misoprostol. Using Hegar's dilator, degree of cervical dilatation before operation was measured. Other parameters assessed included the amount of additional dilatation required (if < Hegar 8), pre-operative and intra-operative blood loss, and associated side effects.
                For the 600 microg group, only five women (16.7%) achieved a cervical dilatation of > or = 8 mm, compared with 28 women (93.3%) in the 400 microg group. Using the 400 microg misoprostol group as a baseline, the odds ratio was 0.014 (95% CI 0.003-0.080) for 600 microg for successful pre-operative cervical dilatation of > or = 8 mm. The mean cervical dilatation for 400 and 600 microg misoprostol was 8.1 mm and 6.6 mm, respectively (P < 0.001). Despite the shorter evacuation time interval of two hours, the 600 microg dose was associated with an increase in side effects such as vaginal bleeding, abdominal pain and a fever of > 38.0 degrees C. However, other than abdominal pain, no significant differences in the frequency of these side effects were shown.
                Use of 400 microg misoprostol with a minimal evacuation time interval of three hours still appears the optimal dosage and evacuation time for cervical priming before first trimester termination of pregnancy. To compare intravaginal misoprostol to prostaglandin (PG) E2 for cervical ripening in women with premature rupture of the membranes (PROM) after 34 weeks of gestation.
                Women with PROM after 34 weeks of gestation and an unripe cervix were randomized to receive PGE2 (2.5 mg) or misoprostol (50 microg). Both agents were placed intravaginally immediately after randomization, and the dose was repeated 6 hours later if necessary. After another 6 hours from the second insertion, oxytocin treatment was started if labor had not begun. Forty patients in each group were required to show a 30% improvement in delivery within 12 hours in the misoprostol group.
                One hundred nine patients were randomized; 54 were assigned to misoprostol and 55 to PGE2. Important demographic and clinical characteristics were similar between the groups. The mean time from first insertion to delivery was 16.4 hours in the misoprostol group and 22.0 hours in the PGE2 group. A second dose was required less frequently in the misoprostol group (22% vs 62% in the PGE2 group), and the percentage of patients delivered within 12 hours was higher in the misoprostol group (41% vs 16%). Tachysystole occurred in 20% and 6% of women in the misoprostol and PGE2 groups, respectively. Hyperstimulation occurred in 9% and 0%, and cesarean delivery in 19% and 26% of women in the misoprostol and PGE2 groups, respectively. Neonatal outcome was similar between groups.
                Intravaginal misoprostol is more effective than local PGE2 application to treat PROM after 34 weeks of gestation, but tachysystole occurs more commonly with misoprostol. To evaluate the induction-to-abortion time of 3 pharmacokinetic-based protocols at 13-20 weeks of gestation.
                A randomized trial was conducted on 153 patients. The oral group (n = 51) received 100 microg misoprostol orally every 2 hours, the vaginal group (n = 51) received 200 microg misoprostol vaginally every 4 hours, and the sublingual group (n = 51) received 100 microg misoprostol sublingually every 2 hours.
                The mean induction-to-delivery time was shorter in the sublingual group (mean, 651 +/- 507) as compared to the vaginal group (mean, 1,056 +/- 634, p = 0.01). The number of patients who delivered within 12 hours was significantly higher in the sublingual group (n = 39, 78%) as compared to the oral (n = 26, 52%) and vaginal (n = 20, 40%) groups (p < 0.001). The numbers of patients who delivered within 24 hours were comparable in the sublingual (n = 47, 94%) and oral (n = 46, 92%) groups but higher than in the vaginal group (n = 39, 78%; p = 0.02). The total misoprostol dose was 543 +/- 422 microg in the sublingual group, 878 +/- 533 microg in the vaginal group and 741 +/- 413 microg in the oral group (p < 0.001).
                A pharmacokinetic-based application of 100 microg of sublingual misoprostol every 4 hours is more effective for induction of second-trimester abortion as compared to 100 microg oral misoprostol every 2 hours and 200 microg vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours. A prospective randomised controlled trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol to that of intravaginal dinoprostone when used for cervical priming prior to the induction of labour; 126 women were recruited to the study and randomised to receive either intravaginal dinoprostone (n = 63) or misoprostol (n = 63) for cervical priming prior to induction of labour. The mean time from insertion of the priming agent to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (925.8 versus 1577.6 minutes), the mean duration of the active length of labour was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (353.7 versus 496.8 minutes) and more women in the misoprostol group delivered in less than 12 hours (92% versus 76.5%). Women in the misoprostol group were less likely to require a repeated dose of prostaglandin for cervical priming and less likely to require oxytocin for augmentation of labour. There was no difference in the number of women who were delivered vaginally or by Ceasarean section between the two groups. More women developed hyperstimulation during labour in the misoprostol group; however there was no difference between the groups in neonatal outcome in respect to low cord pH or Apgar score at delivery or admission to the neonatal special care nursery. The objective of this randomized prospective study was to compare the efficacy of 50 mcg vaginal misoprostol and 3 mg dinoprostone, administered every nine hours for a maximum of three doses, for elective induction of labor in a specific cohort of nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix and more than 40 weeks of gestation.
                One hundred and sixty-three pregnant women with more than 285 days of gestation were recruited and analyzed. The main outcome measures were time from induction to delivery and incidence of vaginal delivery within 12 and 24 hours. Admission rate to the neonatal intensive care unit within 24 hours post delivery was a secondary outcome.
                The induction-delivery interval was significantly lower in the misoprostol group than in the dinoprostone group (11.9 h vs. 15.5 h, p < 0.001). With misoprostol, more women delivered within 12 hours (57.5% vs. 32.5%, p < 0.01) and 24 hours (98.7% vs. 91.4%, p < 0.05), spontaneous rupture of the membranes occurred more frequently (38.8% vs. 20.5%, p < 0.05), there was less need for oxytocin augmentation (65.8% vs. 81.5%, p < 0.05) and fewer additional doses were required (7.5% vs. 22%, p < 0.05). Although not statistically significant, a lower Caesarean section (CS) rate was observed with misoprostol (7.5% vs. 13.3%, p > 0.05) but with the disadvantage of higher abnormal fetal heart rate (FHR) tracings (22.5% vs. 12%, p > 0.05). From the misoprostol group more neonates were admitted to the intensive neonatal unit, than from the dinoprostone group (13.5% vs. 4.8%, p > 0.05). One woman had an unexplained stillbirth following the administration of one dose of dinoprostone.
                Vaginal misoprostol, compared with dinoprostone in the regimens used, is more effective in elective inductions of labor beyond 40 weeks of gestation. Nevertheless, this is at the expense of more abnormal FHR tracings and more admissions to the neonatal unit, indicating that the faster approach is not necessarily the better approach to childbirth. To compare the labour pattern and uterine activity of oral misoprostol with oxytocin for labour induction in women presenting with prelabour rupture of membranes at term.
                Prospective randomised study.
                Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong.
                Eighty women presenting with prelabour rupture of membranes at term.
                The women were randomised to receive either 100 microg misoprostol orally every 4 hours to a maximum of three doses, or intravenous oxytocin infusion according to the hospital protocol. Intrauterine pressure transducers were inserted one hour before induction of labour in both groups of women. We compared the pattern of uterine activity, the induction-to-delivery interval, duration of labour, mode of delivery and neonatal outcome between the two groups.
                Both oxytocin and oral misoprostol caused an increase in uterine activity within one hour of labour induction. Peak uterine activity was reached 6-8 h after oral misoprostol, with persistent effects, and 8-10 h after oxytocin, requiring continuous titration of medication. The duration of labour was significantly reduced in nulliparous women, but not in those who were multiparous in the misoprostol group. The induction-to-delivery interval, the mode of delivery and the perinatal outcome were similar for the two groups.
                Oral misoprostol caused earlier peak uterine activity, compared with oxytocin (6-8 h vs 8-10 h). Oral misoprostol was not only as effective as oxytocin in inducing labour in women at term with prelabour rupture of the membranes, but it reduced significantly the duration of labour in nulliparous women. We compared labor induced by vaginal misoprostol versus a supracervical Foley catheter and oral misoprostol. Singleton pregnancies at > or = 24 weeks' gestation were randomized to either an initial 25-microg dose of intravaginal misoprostol, followed by 50-microg intravaginal doses at 3- to 6-hour intervals, or a supracervical Foley balloon and 100 microg of oral misoprostol at 4- to 6-hour intervals. Primary outcome was time from induction to delivery. One hundred twenty-six women were randomized to vaginal misoprostol alone (group I) and 106 women to Foley and oral misoprostol (group II). The groups were similar in age, weight, gestational age, parity, indication for induction of labor, and oxytocin use. Cesarean delivery rates at 37% and cesarean indications were similar ( P = 0.25). The time from induction to delivery in group II (12.9 hours) was significantly shorter than that in group I (17.8 hours, P < 0.001). Uterine tachysystole occurred less often in the vaginal misoprostol group (21% versus 39%, P = 0.015). Compared with vaginal misoprostol, delivery within 24 hours was significantly more likely with a Foley balloon and oral misoprostol. The use of terbutaline and peripartum outcomes were similar in the two groups. This study was undertaken to determine whether induction of labor with oral misoprostol will result in fewer cesarean deliveries than intravenous oxytocin in nulliparous women with premature rupture of membranes at term.
                Three hundred five women at 10 centers were randomly assigned to receive oral misoprostol, 100 microg every 6 hours to a maximum of two doses or intravenous oxytocin. The primary outcome measure was cesarean deliveries. Secondary outcomes were time from induction to vaginal delivery and measures of maternal and neonatal safety.
                The study was stopped prematurely because of recruitment difficulties. We present the results for the 305 enrolled women. There was no difference in the proportion of women who underwent cesarean delivery (20.1% in the misoprostol group, 19.9% in the oxytocin group). The time interval from induction to vaginal delivery was also similar (11.9 hours for the misoprostol group, and 11.8 hours for the oxytocin group). Maternal and neonatal safety outcomes were similar for the two treatments. More infants born to women in the misoprostol group received intravenous antibiotics in the neonatal period (16.4% vs 6.9%, P=.01), although there were no differences in chorioamnionitis or in proven neonatal infections. Women receiving misoprostol were less likely to have postpartum hemorrhage than those receiving oxytocin (1.9% vs 6.2%, P=.05).
                Oral misoprostol does not offer any advantage in time from induction to vaginal delivery or risk of cesarean section. To compare vaginal misoprostol with dinoprostone for induction of labour.
                Randomised multicentre trial.
                Labour wards of one university hospital and two teaching hospitals.
                Six hundred and eighty-one women with indication for labour induction at >or=36 weeks of gestation, singleton pregnancy and no previous ceasarean section.
                Misoprostol (25 mcg, hospital-prepared capsule) in the posterior vaginal fornix, every four hours, maximum three times daily or dinoprostone gel (1 mg) every four hours. Oxytocin was administered if necessary.
                Primary: 'adverse neonatal outcome' (5-minute Apgar score <7 and/or umbilical cord pH <7.15). Secondary: labour duration, mode of delivery and patient satisfaction.
                Three hundred and forty-one women received misoprostol and 340 dinoprostone. The median induction-delivery interval was longer in the misoprostol group compared with the dinoprostone group (25 versus 19 hours, P= 0.008). The caesarean section rate was lower in the misoprostol group: 16.1%versus 21%, but this difference was not statistically significant RR = 0.8 (95% CI 0.6-1.04). 'Adverse neonatal outcome' was found to be similar in both groups: 21% in the misoprostol and 23% in the dinoprostone groups. Significantly fewer neonates were admitted to NICU in the misoprostol group compared with dinoprostone 19%versus 26% (RR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-0.98).
                Misoprostol in this dosing regimen is a safe method of labour induction. NICU admission rates were lower in the misoprostol group. No difference could be detected in patient satisfaction between groups. The objective of the study was to compare the effectiveness, safety, and side effects of low-dose oral misoprostol with vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction.
                Women with Bishop score 6 or less admitted for labor induction at term were eligible for this randomized controlled trial. Exclusion criteria were multiple pregnancy, breech, fetal distress, or previous uterine scar. The allocation to the oral misoprostol group (20 microg given every 2 hours increased to 40 microg depending on uterine contractions) or to the vaginal dinoprostone group (2 mg twice, 6 hours apart) was contained in a sealed, opaque, and consecutively numbered envelope.
                Two hundred women (100 in each group) were included. The proportion of vaginal delivery within 24 hours was 56% in the misoprostol group and 62% in the dinoprostone group (relative risk 0.90, 95% CI 0.72-1.14). The risk of cesarean section was 18% and 19%, respectively. The median interval to delivery, calculated from survival analysis, was longer in the misoprostol group (1305 minutes) compared with the dinoprostone group (1080 minutes). The log-rank test was not significant (P =.35). Uterine hyperstimulation occurred in 9% of women in the misoprostol group compared with 14% in the dinoprostone group (P =.27). The only significant difference in neonatal outcomes was a more frequent presence of thick meconium in the misoprostol group (P =.03).
                We found no difference in terms of effectiveness and safety between low-dose oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone used for induction of labor. This regimen avoids the excessive uterine contractility noted in previous studies, where higher doses of misoprostol were administered at longer intervals. To compare the impact of 400 mug oral versus self-administered vaginal misoprostol at home on pre-operative cervical priming in both primigravid and multigravid women prior to first trimester surgical abortion.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Norwegian University Teaching Hospital.
                Three hundred and thirty-eight women undergoing surgical abortion between 7 and 12 weeks of gestation.
                The women were randomised to either 400 microg of oral misoprostol the evening before or 400-microg of self-administered vaginal misoprostol at home the same day as vacuum aspiration. Main outcome measures Pre-operative cervical dilatation, complications and acceptability.
                The median cervical dilatation was 6.2 mm (range 0-11 mm) for the women in the 400 mug oral misoprostol and 6.5 mm (range 0-11 mm) in the 400-microg vaginal misoprostol groups. The median pre-operative dilatation was larger in multigravidae (6.4 and 6.7 mm for the oral and vaginal routes, respectively) than in primigravidae (5.8 and 6.0 mm, respectively). In primigravidae, 19% achieved a pre-operative dilatation of > or = 7 mm, with no significant difference between oral and vaginal dosage. In multigravidae, 52% achieved a pre-operative dilatation of > or = 7 mm with vaginal dosage, compared with 36% with oral dosage (P = 0.03). There was no difference between non-immigrant versus immigrant women in pre-operative cervical dilatation. The 400-microg oral dosage group had a higher risk of bleeding, compared with the group receiving 400-microg vaginal misoprostol [odds ratio (OR) = 10.4; confidence interval (CI) 5.2-20.8]. There was no difference between non-immigrant and immigrant women in acceptability of self-administered vaginal misoprostol; almost all women found this administration route acceptable. Complications were minor and were distributed equally between the two dosage groups.
                The vaginal route will result in a satisfactory dilatation in about half of multigravidae but is much less effective in primigravidae. The oral route does not lead to satisfactory dilatation in either group and is associated with a higher occurrence of pre-operative bleeding. Self-administered vaginal misoprostol at home is highly acceptable. To evaluate the efficacy of oral and vaginal misoprostol compared with the standard regimen using dinoprostone for induction of labor.
                We conducted a multicenter, randomized controlled trial in Cape Town, South Africa. A total of 573 women admitted for induction of labor were randomized to receive oral misoprostol, vaginal misoprostol, or the control, dinoprostone. Misoprostol was given orally or vaginally as a 50-microg dose at 6-hour intervals to a maximum of four doses. The dinoprostone gel was given as a 1-mg dose in the posterior fornix every 6 hours (maximum two doses).
                There was no significant difference in vaginal delivery rate in 24 hours between the vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone groups. However, significantly fewer women delivered vaginally in the oral misoprostol group compared with those in the dinoprostone group (relative risk 0.71, 99% confidence interval 0.51, 0.99). The median induction to vaginal delivery time in the vaginal misoprostol, oral misoprostol, and dinoprostone groups was 12 hours, 23 hours, and 14 hours, respectively. The cesarean rate was approximately 33% in all the groups. There were more cesareans performed for fetal distress in the vaginal misoprostol group compared with the dinoprostone group (relative risk 2.86, 99% confidence interval 1.49, 5.46). There was a higher incidence of tachysystole in the vaginal misoprostol group (5.8%) compared with the other two groups: oral misoprostol (0.8%) and dinoprostone (0.8%), but this difference was not statistically significant. There were no differences in maternal or fetal complications.
                Vaginal misoprostol is as effective as dinoprostone in induction of labor, but it is associated with more tachysystole and cesarean sections for fetal distress compared with dinoprostone. Oral misoprostol results in fewer vaginal deliveries in 24 hours, but it is not associated with increased tachysystole or fetal distress. Mifepristone was recently approved in the United States. Regimens with shorter intervals may be more acceptable. The objective of this study was to determine whether the oral route of misoprostol was as effective as the vaginal route of misoprostol 1 day after mifepristone. A prospective, open-labeled, randomized trial of healthy adult women up to 63 days pregnant and wanting a medical abortion were randomized to use either two doses of oral misoprostol 400 microg taken 2 h apart or misoprostol 800 microg vaginally. Women self-administered misoprostol 1 day after taking one-third of the standard dose of mifepristone (200 mg) orally. Women then returned to the clinic up to 5 days later for a repeat sonogram evaluation. A dose of vaginal misoprostol was administered to women with a continuing pregnancy who then returned 1 day later to Day 15. The primary outcome measures were a complete medical abortion by the first or by the second follow-up visits. Surgical intervention was indicated for continuing pregnancy at the second follow-up visit, excessive bleeding, or persistent products of conception 5 weeks later. One thousand one hundred sixty-eight women were enrolled. Of the 1144 (98%) women who complied with their random assignment, two oral doses of misoprostol (800 microg total) were 90% effective at inducing an abortion by the first follow-up visit, compared with one dose of misoprostol by vagina of 97% (chi(2) = 23.95, p = 0.001). By the second follow-up visit, the complete abortion rate was 95% for oral misoprostol and 99% for vaginal misoprostol (chi(2) = 21.76, p = 0.001). There were minimal differences in side effects. Women preferred the oral route. The trial demonstrated that although two doses of oral misoprostol were effective, the vaginal misoprostol was more effective at inducing an early medical abortion at 1 day after low-dose mifepristone, and the regimen could be extended to 63 days gestation. To compare the effectiveness of vaginal misoprostol administered 6 or 12 hourly for second trimester pregnancy termination.
                A randomised controlled trial.
                University teaching hospital.
                Two hundred and seventy-nine pregnant women at gestations between 14 and 26 weeks undergoing pregnancy termination.
                Women were randomised to receive 600-microg misoprostol tablets vaginally either every 6 hours or every 12 hours until abortion occurred.
                Induction-abortion interval, success rate within 24 and 48 hours and adverse effects.
                There was no significant difference in the median induction to abortion interval 6 hours (16 hours) and 12 hours (16 hours; P= 0.80). The total dose of misoprostol was higher in the 6-hour group (1800 vs 1200 microg). The cumulative abortion rates within 24 hours were 74% and 67% and within 48 hours 94% and 92%, in the 6- and 12-hour groups, respectively. Fever was more common in the 6-hour group (53%) versus the 12-hour group (31%; P < 0.001). The incidence of nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, severe bleeding and abdominal pain were similar.
                Misoprostol (600 microg) administered at 12-hour intervals was associated with fewer adverse effects and was as effective as a 6-hour interval. To determine the efficacy of 200 microg single dose oral misoprostol as a cervical priming agent at term.
                In this double-blind randomized trial, 156 pregnant women requiring induction of labor with gestational age of 37-42 weeks and Bishop score < or =5, were randomized to receive either 200 microg of misoprostol or a placebo, orally. Labor was induced with intravenous oxytocin infusion 12 h after oral medication if the patient did not go into labor. The primary outcome was the change in the Bishop score 12 h after oral medication. The secondary outcomes were the timings starting from the drug administration to the onset of uterine activity, interval between oral medication and delivery, oxytocin need for induction, mode of delivery, frequency of side effects, and neonatal and maternal outcome. The chi-square or Fisher exact test, Student's t-test, and Mann-Whitney U-test were used for analysis of the data.
                There were no significant differences in maternal characteristics or indications of induction. The Bishop score 12 h after oral medication significantly improved in the misoprostol group compared with the control group [55 (70%)>8 vs. 4 (5%)>8; P<0.001]. The induction rate was significantly reduced in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). The interval between oral medication and the onset of uterine activity was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). The interval between oral medication and delivery was also significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). The cesarean delivery rate was significantly lower in the misoprostol group (P<0.001). There were no differences between the groups with respect to the incidence of tachysystole, hyperstimulation, adverse neonatal or maternal outcome.
                Oral administration of 200 microg single dose of misoprostol is an effective agent not only for cervical priming but also for induction of labor at term. Furthermore, it reduces the rate of cesarean deliveries. A prospective study was carried out at a tertiary care hospital on 100 pregnant women admitted for induction of labour to compare the effect of misoprostol and dinoprostone on the induction of labour. The patients were divided randomly into two groups of 50 each. Group I received 25 microg misoprostol intravaginally every 3 h (maximum dose 200 microg), and Group II received 0.5 mg PGE(2) gel (dinoprostonev) intracervically every 6 h (maximum three doses in 24 h) until good uterine contractions started. The primary outcome measure was vaginal delivery occurring within 24 h of administration of the first dose of either study drug (successful induction). Statistical analysis were conducted using chi(2) test, Fisher exact test, Student's t-test and relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). In the misoprostol group, more patients achieved successful inductions as compared with the dinoprostone group, 80% vs. 62% (P = 0.0473, RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.95-2.81). The mean induction to delivery interval (IDI) was shorter in the misoprostol group, 13.30+/-8.74 (3-40.15) hours, as compared with the dinoprostone group, 18.53+/-11.33 (2-48.07) hours (P = 0.011). Misoprostol was associated with significantly less oxytocin use (18% vs. 50%) as compared with dinoprostone (P = 0.001 RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19-0.69). In conclusion, although both misoprostol and dinoprostone appear to be effective agents for labour induction, misoprostol is cheaper, stable at room temperature, has shorter IDI and requires less oxytocin. These results make misoprostol superior to dinoprostone for induction of labour especially in developing and tropical countries. Misoprostol is being used increasingly in clinical practice for cervical ripening in first-trimester abortions, but because of lack of good evidence of its effectiveness, administration consensus has not been reached on dosage, route of administration, time of administration pre-operatively and gestational age group. In this study we tested the hypothesis that self-administration of 600 micrograms vaginal misoprostol is feasible and when used 2-4 hours pre-operatively results in sufficient cervical dilatation to make suction curettage easier.
                A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was undertaken. Two hundred and seventy-eight women scheduled for termination of pregnancy of up to 12 weeks' duration by manual vacuum aspiration were assigned to receive either 600 micrograms misoprostol pre-operatively, or placebo. The achievement of 'satisfactory' (> or = 7 mm) baseline cervical dilatation after 2-4 hours was evaluated as the primary outcome. Secondary outcome measurements included ease and duration of the procedure. Side-effects such as pre-operative bleeding, gastro-intestinal complaints and pain as well as adverse events were noted in all cases.
                Self-administration of vaginal misoprostol was successful in all women and 273 women were evaluated for main end-points. A significantly larger proportion of patients in the treatment group reached cervical dilatation of > or = 7 mm (67.3% v. 30.9%, P < 0.0001). The side-effects were minimal and comparable in the two groups. In the treatment group the mean procedure duration was significantly shorter (220 seconds v. 321 seconds, P = 0.0013) and the procedure was more likely to be rated by the operator as 'easy' (81.8% v. 63.3%, P = 0.0082). This resulted in a significant reduction in treatment failure in the < 70-day gestation group (5.0% v. 14.7%, P = 0.005).
                It is feasible, safe and effective for 600 micrograms misoprostol to be self-administered vaginally 2-4 hours pre-operatively for cervical priming prior to manual vacuum aspiration. Further research is needed to establish optimal use in the first trimester and to determine patient acceptance. To compare efficacy, safety, and tolerance of oral misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction.
                Two hundred women were randomized to receive single doses of oral misoprostol 200 microg or 0.5 mg of dinoprostone intracervically every 6 hours for a maximum four doses.
                The intervals from administration of the drug to active phase of labor (11.1 hours [7-24] versus 15.8 hours [7.5-29.62], P =. 01), to delivery (14.0 hours [8.42-27.61] versus 20.2 hours [16.7-32. 8], P =.01), and to rupture of membranes (10.0 hours [4.95-24.7] versus 15.6 hours [8.2-29.2], P =.003) were significantly shorter in the misoprostol group. All those variables were not distributed normally, so results are presented as median and interquartile range. The rates of women who needed oxytocin (68% versus 52%, P =.03) and cesarean for failed induction (9% versus 1%, P =.01) were higher in the dinoprostone group.
                A single dose of 200 microg oral misoprostol was more effective for cervical ripening and labor induction than 0.5 mg of dinoprostone intracervically every 6 hours, with a maximum of four doses. To compare the efficacy of vaginal with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy after pretreatment with mifepristone.
                Women requesting termination of second-trimester pregnancy were randomized into two groups. Thirty-six to 48 hours after oral administration of 200 mg of mifepristone, women were given either oral or vaginal misoprostol 200 microg every 3 hours for a maximum of five doses in the first 24 hours. Women receiving oral misoprostol also were given a vaginal placebo (vitamin B6), whereas those receiving vaginal misoprostol were given an oral placebo. If they failed to abort, a second course was given by the same route.
                The median induction-abortion interval in the vaginal group (9 hours) was significantly shorter than that in the oral group (13 hours). The percentage of women aborting within 24 hours in the vaginal group (90%) was significantly higher than that in the oral group (69%). The median amount of misoprostol used in the vaginal group (600 microg) also was significantly less than that in the oral group (1000 microg). There was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects between the two groups except for fatigue and breast tenderness, which were more common in the oral group. Seventy-six percent of the women preferred the oral route, and 24.5% of the women preferred the vaginal route.
                Vaginal misoprostol is more effective than oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy after pretreatment with mifepristone, but more women preferred the oral route. To compare the efficacy and safety of two prostaglandin derivatives, misoprostol and dinoprostone, for ripening the cervix and inducing labor in women with an unfavorable cervix.
                One hundred fifty-five women admitted for induction of labor to St. John's Mercy Medical Center, a teaching community hospital, were randomized to one of two methods: intravaginal misoprostol, 50 microg every 4 hours up to three doses (n = 76); and intracervical dinoprostone gel, 0.5 mg every 6 hours up to three doses (n = 79).
                Misoprostol was more effective than dinoprostone in causing cervical ripening (P = .01), inducing labor (P < .001), shortening the duration of labor (P < .001), and decreasing the need for oxytocin augmentation (P < .001). Nonreassuring fetal heart monitoring patterns associated with hyperstimulation were significantly more frequent (P < .001), and the incidence of cesarean deliveries because of this indication was significantly higher (P = .002) in patients receiving misoprostol.
                Misoprostol is an effective agent for cervical ripening and labor induction, but it causes an increase in cesarean deliveries associated with uterine hyperstimulation. The objective was to compare the efficacy and complications of intravaginal misoprostol application with oxytocin infusion for induction of labor in advanced aged pregnancies with a Bishop score of < 6.
                A hundred advanced aged (> or = 35 years) pregnant patients with a Bishop score of < 6 were randomized into two groups. The first group (50 patients) received 50 microg intravaginal misoprostol four times with 4 h intervals and the second group received oxytocin infusion for induction of labor starting from 2 mIU/min and was increased every 30 min with 2 mIU/min increments up to a maximum of 40 mIU/min. The time from induction to delivery, the route of delivery, fetal outcome, and maternal complications were recorded. Statistical analyses were performed using the Mann-Whitney U, Chi-squared and t tests to determine differences between the two groups. A p value < or = 0.05 was considered significant.
                Misoprostol was superior for induction of labor in advanced aged pregnancies with Bishop score of < 6, as the mean time from induction to delivery was 9.61 +/- 4.12 h and 11.46 +/- 4.86 h in the misoprostol and oxytocin groups respectively, with a significant difference between the groups (p = 0.04). The rate of vaginal delivery was higher in the misoprostol group (84.0%) than in the oxytocin group (80.0%), but the difference did not reach significance (p = 0.60). The rates of placental abruption and postpartum hemorrhage were similar in both groups and no cases of uterine rupture occurred. The 1- and 5-min mean Apgar scores were 6.98 +/- 1.17 to 9.08 +/- 0.99 and 6.88 +/- 1.81 to 9.00 +/- 1.35 in the misoprostol and oxytocin groups respectively, with no significant differences between the groups (p = 0.74, p = 0.83). No cases of asphyxia were present. The rate of admission to the neonatal intensive care unit was similar in both groups.
                Intravaginal misoprostol seems to be an alternative method to oxytocin in the induction of labor in advanced aged pregnant women with low Bishop scores, as it is efficacious, cheap, and easy to use. But large studies are necessary to clarify safety with regard to the rare complications such as uterine rupture. To compare three methods of labour induction.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Academic hospitals in Johannesburg, South Africa.
                Women with intact membranes due for induction of labour.
                Randomised, sealed opaque envelopes were used to allocate women to labour induction with extra-amniotic Foley catheter/titrated oral misoprostol solution (N = 174), titrated oral misoprostol solution alone (N = 176), or vaginal dinoprostone (N = 176). Misoprostol was dissolved in water and 20-40 g was given 2-hourly.
                These were failure to deliver vaginally within 24 hours, additional measures for induction or augmentation of labour, analgesia, and maternal and fetal complications.
                In the Foley catheter group, misoprostol was required in all but 1 case. Failure to deliver vaginally within 24 hours was similar for the three groups (79/174 v. 70/176 v. 70/176 respectively). Labour augmentation, caesarean section and instrumental delivery were used somewhat more frequently in the Foley/misoprostol group than in the misoprostol alone group, but these differences were not statistically significant. More analgesia was used in the Foley catheter/misoprostol group than in the misoprostol group (64/172 v. 46/175). Side-effects and neonatal complications were similar for the three groups.
                Use of extra-amniotic Foley catheter placement showed no measurable benefits over the use of oral misoprostol alone, or vaginal dinoprostone.
Vaginal misoprostol in doses above 25 mcg four-hourly was more effective than conventional methods of labour induction, but with more uterine hyperstimulation. Lower doses (25 mcg four-hourly or less) were similar to conventional methods in effectiveness and risks. The authors request information on cases of uterine rupture known to readers. The vaginal route should not be researched further as another Cochrane review has shown that the oral route of administration is preferable to the vaginal route. Professional and governmental bodies should agree guidelines for the use of misoprostol, based on the best available evidence and local circumstances.
[Note: The 27 citations in the awaiting classification section of the review may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.]