BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025
Efficacy and safety of misoprostol versus oxytocin for labor induction in women with prelabor rupture of membranes: a meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Che Anluzi, Si Si, Liu Jing
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) complicates 8% of pregnancies, often necessitating labor induction to prevent maternal and neonatal complications. Misoprostol, a cost-effective prostaglandin, has been proposed as an alternative to oxytocin for labor induction in PROM cases, but its efficacy and safety remain debated.
METHODS: The PubMed, Web of science, Embase, Google scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library databases were searched on January 25, 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing misoprostol and oxytocin for labor induction in term PROM were eligible. The primary outcomes were vaginal birth within 24 h and the induction to delivery interval. Secondary outcomes included the duration of second stage of labor, the induction to active labor, cesarean section, postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), and other maternal/neonatal complications.
RESULTS: Data from 20 RCTs involving 2,980 participants were analyzed. Misoprostol significantly reduced the induction-to-delivery interval and the duration of the second stage of labor compared to oxytocin (WMD = -62.82, 95% CI (-110.56, -15.08); WMD = -4.29, 95% CI (-8.05, -0.52), respectively). It also lowered the risk of PPH (OR = 0.63, 95% CI (0.41, 0.98)). However, no significant differences were found in other outcomes between misoprostol and oxytocin.
CONCLUSIONS: Misoprostol is a viable alternative to oxytocin for labor induction in PROM, offering shorter labor durations and reduced PPH risk without compromising maternal and neonatal outcomes. Further researches are needed to optimize dosing, administration routes, and assess maternal satisfaction.
METHODS: The PubMed, Web of science, Embase, Google scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Library databases were searched on January 25, 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing misoprostol and oxytocin for labor induction in term PROM were eligible. The primary outcomes were vaginal birth within 24 h and the induction to delivery interval. Secondary outcomes included the duration of second stage of labor, the induction to active labor, cesarean section, postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), and other maternal/neonatal complications.
RESULTS: Data from 20 RCTs involving 2,980 participants were analyzed. Misoprostol significantly reduced the induction-to-delivery interval and the duration of the second stage of labor compared to oxytocin (WMD = -62.82, 95% CI (-110.56, -15.08); WMD = -4.29, 95% CI (-8.05, -0.52), respectively). It also lowered the risk of PPH (OR = 0.63, 95% CI (0.41, 0.98)). However, no significant differences were found in other outcomes between misoprostol and oxytocin.
CONCLUSIONS: Misoprostol is a viable alternative to oxytocin for labor induction in PROM, offering shorter labor durations and reduced PPH risk without compromising maternal and neonatal outcomes. Further researches are needed to optimize dosing, administration routes, and assess maternal satisfaction.