International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2006
Sublingual vs. vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание 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.
Feitosa F E L, Sampaio Z S, Alencar C A, Amorim M M R, Passini R
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare sublingual with vaginal misoprostol for the induction of labor.
METHODS: This double-blind clinical trial randomized 150 women to receive every 6 h 25 mug of sublingual misoprostol and vaginal placebo or 25 mug of vaginal misoprostol and sublingual placebo. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were analyzed and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated. The significance level was 5%.
RESULTS: Vaginal delivery rates were 57% in the sublingual group and 69% in the vaginal group (RR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6-1.1). There were 11 cases of fetal distress in the sublingual group and 4 cases in the vaginal group (RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 0.9-8.2). There were no significant differences in the number of doses needed, interval between first dose and delivery, incidence of contractility disturbances, or neonatal results.
CONCLUSION: The administration of misoprostol 25 mug by the sublingual route was neither more effective nor safer than the same dose administered vaginally.
METHODS: This double-blind clinical trial randomized 150 women to receive every 6 h 25 mug of sublingual misoprostol and vaginal placebo or 25 mug of vaginal misoprostol and sublingual placebo. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were analyzed and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated. The significance level was 5%.
RESULTS: Vaginal delivery rates were 57% in the sublingual group and 69% in the vaginal group (RR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6-1.1). There were 11 cases of fetal distress in the sublingual group and 4 cases in the vaginal group (RR, 2.7; 95% CI, 0.9-8.2). There were no significant differences in the number of doses needed, interval between first dose and delivery, incidence of contractility disturbances, or neonatal results.
CONCLUSION: The administration of misoprostol 25 mug by the sublingual route was neither more effective nor safer than the same dose administered vaginally.