Misoprostol versus oxytocin for labor induction in term and post-term pregnancy
randomized controlled trial
Keywords:
Misoprostol, Oxytocin, Prostaglandins, Labor induction, Randomized controlled trialAbstract
CONTEXT: 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. OBJECTIVE: To compare intravaginal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction in pregnant women with unripe cervices. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: The study was performed at the Leonor Mendes de Barros Maternity Hospital between November 1998 and December 2000. PARTICIPANTS: 210 pregnant women with intact membranes and indication for labor induction were selected. PROCEDURES: The women randomly received 25 µg of vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours, not exceeding 8 doses (105 women), or oxytocin in a continuous infusion (105 women). MAIN MEASUREMENTS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 25 µg of misoprostol used vaginally every 4 hours is safer and more efficient for cervical ripening and labor induction than oxytocin.
Downloads
References
Wing DA, Jones MM, Rahall A, Goodwin TM, Paul RH. A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172(6):1804-10.
Campos GA, Guzmán S, Rodriguez JG, Voto LS, Margulies M. Misoprostol - un análogo de la PGE1 - para la inducción de parto a término: estudio comparativo y randomizado con oxitocina. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 1994;59(3):190-5. discus- sion 195-6.
Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Del Valle GO, Delke I, Schroeder PA, Briones DK. Labor induction with the prostag- landin E1 methyl analogue misoprostol versus oxytocin: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 1993;81(3):332-6.
Escudero F, Contreras H. A comparative trial of labor induc- tion with misoprostol versus oxytocin. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1997;57(2):139-43.
Kramer RL, Gilson GJ, Morrison DS, Martin D, Gonzales JL, Qualls CR. A randomized trial of misoprostol and oxytocin for induction of labor: safety and efficacy. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89(3):387-91.
Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964;24:266-8.
Keirse MJ. Prostaglandins in preinduction cervical ripening. Meta-analysis of worldwide clinical experience. J Reprod Med 1993;38(1 Suppl):89-100.
Buser D, Mora G, Arias F. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89(4):581-5.
Margulies M, Campos Pérez G, Voto LS. Misoprostol to in- duce labour. Lancet 1992;339(8784):64.
Bugalho A, Bique C, Machungo F, Bergström S. Vaginal misoprostol as an alternative to oxytocin for induction of labor in women with late fetal death. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1995;74(3):194-8.
Kadanali S, Küçüközkan T, Zor N, Kumtepe Y. Comparison of labor induction with misoprostol vs. oxytocin/prostaglandin E2 in term pregnancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1996;55(2):99-104.
Wing DA, Paul RH. A comparison of differing dosing regi- mens of vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996;175(1):158-64.
Wing DA, Ham D, Paul RH. A comparison of orally adminis- tered misoprostol with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;180(5):1155-60.
Hofmeyer GJ, Gulmezoglu AM. Vaginal misoprostol for cervi- cal ripening and labour induction in late pregnancy (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2000. Oxford: Update Software.
Wing DA, Ortiz-Omphroy G, Paul RH. A comparison of in- termittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuos dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;177(3):612-8.
Clark A, Cook V, Hill P, Spinnato J. Cervical ripening and labor induction: misoprostol vs. dinoprostone. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;178:30.
Patel A, Gilles JM, Moffett D, Mahram R, Diro M, Burkett G. Can misoprostol be interchanged with oxytocin for augmenta- tion of labor? Obstet Gynecol 2000;95(Suppl):105.
Zieman M, Fong SK, Benowitz NL, Banskter D, Darney PD. Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal admin- istration. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90(1):88-92.
Macedo RM, Ávila I, Gonçalves MM. A randomized trial of misoprostol and placebo for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Rev Brasil Ginecol Obstet 1998;20:457-62.
Wing DA, Rahall A, Jones MM, Goodwin TM, Paul RH. Misoprostol: an effective agent for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172(6):1811-6.
