A randomised trial comparing low dose vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for labour induction.

作者: N. Gemund , S. Scherjon , S. le Cessie , J.H. Schagen van Leeuwen , J. Roosmalen

DOI: 10.1046/J.1471-0528.2003.00010.X

关键词:

摘要: Objective  To compare vaginal misoprostol with dinoprostone for induction of labour. Design  Randomised multicentre trial. Setting  Labour wards one university hospital and two teaching hospitals. Population  Six hundred eighty-one women indication labour at ≥36 weeks gestation, singleton pregnancy no previous ceasarean section. Methods  Misoprostol (25 mcg, hospital-prepared capsule) in the posterior fornix, every four hours, maximum three times daily or gel (1 mg) hours. Oxytocin was administered if necessary. Main outcome measures  Primary: ‘adverse neonatal outcome’ (5-minute Apgar score <7 and/or umbilical cord pH <7.15). Secondary: duration, mode delivery patient satisfaction. Results  Three forty-one received 340 dinoprostone. The median induction–delivery interval longer group compared versus 19 P= 0.008). caesarean section rate lower group: 16.1%versus 21%, but this difference not statistically significant RR = 0.8 (95% CI 0.6–1.04). ‘Adverse found to be similar both groups: 21% 23% groups. Significantly fewer neonates were admitted NICU 19%versus 26% (RR 0.7, 95% 0.5–0.98). Conclusions  dosing regimen is a safe method induction. admission rates group. No could detected satisfaction between

参考文章(21)
M. J. N. C. Keirse, Prostaglandins in preinduction cervical ripening. Meta-analysis of worldwide clinical experience. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. ,vol. 38, pp. 89- 100 ,(1993)
Paul M. Magtibay, Kirk D. Ramin, Denise Y. Harris, Patrick S. Ramsey, Paul L. Ogburn, Misoprostol as a Labor Induction Agent The Journal of Maternal-fetal Medicine. ,vol. 7, pp. 15- 18 ,(1998) , 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6661(199801/02)7:1<15::AID-MFM4>3.0.CO;2-U
PATRICK BELFRAGE, ELI SMEDVIG, LEIF GJESSING, TORBJØRN MOE EGGEBØ, INGER ØKLAND, A randomized prospective study of misoprostol and dinoproston for induction of labor Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. ,vol. 79, pp. 1065- 1068 ,(2000) , 10.1034/J.1600-0412.2000.0790121065.X
Alisa B. Goldberg, Mara B. Greenberg, Philip D. Darney, Misoprostol and Pregnancy The New England Journal of Medicine. ,vol. 344, pp. 38- 47 ,(2001) , 10.1056/NEJM200101043440107
Kenneth G. Perry, J.Elaine Larmon, Warren L. May, Lynda G. Robinette, Rick W. Martin, Cervical ripening: a randomized comparison between intravaginal misoprostol and an intracervical balloon catheter combined with intravaginal dinoprostone. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ,vol. 178, pp. 1333- 1340 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0002-9378(98)70340-0
Deborah A. Wing, Margaret M. Jones, Ann Rahall, T.Murphy Goodwin, Richard H. Paul, A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ,vol. 172, pp. 1804- 1810 ,(1995) , 10.1016/0002-9378(95)91415-3
John D. Yeast, Angela Jones, Mary Poskin, Induction of labor and the relationship to cesarean delivery: A review of 7001 consecutive inductions. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. ,vol. 180, pp. 628- 633 ,(1999) , 10.1016/S0002-9378(99)70265-6
Ashalatha Shetty, Peter Danielian, Allan Templeton, A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol tablets in induction of labour at term. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. ,vol. 108, pp. 238- 243 ,(2001) , 10.1111/J.1471-0528.2001.00073.X
Y Herabutya, P O-Prasertsawat, Second trimester abortion using intravaginal misoprostol International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. ,vol. 60, pp. 161- 165 ,(1998) , 10.1016/S0020-7292(97)00244-0