MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.11.028

Медицинская библиотека · European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2005

A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor.

Uludag Seyfettin, Salihoglu Saricali Funda, Madazli Riza, Cepni Ismail

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy and safety of oral (100 microg) and vaginal (50 microg) misoprostol for labor induction.

STUDY

DESIGN

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSION

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.

Для цитирования: Uludag Seyfettin, Salihoglu Saricali Funda, Madazli Riza, Cepni Ismail. A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor.. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. 2005. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.11.028.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.