Premium
Safety and efficacy of titrated oral misoprostol solution versus vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor: A single‐center randomized control trial
Author(s) -
Wang Xiu,
Zhang Chao,
Li Xia,
Qi Hongyan,
Liu Qing,
Lei Jing
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
international journal of gynecology and obstetrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.895
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1879-3479
pISSN - 0020-7292
DOI - 10.1002/ijgo.13546
Subject(s) - dinoprostone , medicine , misoprostol , vaginal delivery , labor induction , obstetrics , induction of labor , single center , pregnancy , anesthesia , oxytocin , abortion , surgery , prostaglandin e2 , biology , genetics
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of the hourly administration of titrated oral misoprostol solution (OMS) and vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor. Methods Titrated OMS was administrated hourly for induction of labor, starting with a dose of 20 µg and terminating at a dose of 50 µg. The safety and efficacy of OMS were compared with that of vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor. Results From June 2016 to October 2019, 2280 (78.3%) and 2115 (72.9%) women who received titrated OMS and vaginal dinoprostone, respectively, had a vaginal delivery ( P = 0.005). Cesarean delivery was performed in 632 (21.7%) and 783 (27.0%) women who received titrated OMS and vaginal dinoprostone, respectively ( P = 0.008). Tachysystole with changes in fetal heart rate (FHR) was seen in 104 (3.6%) and 249 (8.6%) women in the OMS and dinoprostone groups, respectively ( P = 0.007). The frequency of non‐reassuring FHR was lower in the OMS group compared to the dinoprostone group ( P = 0.006). Conclusion The titrated OMS has an efficacy comparable to vaginal dinoprostone. Moreover, it causes a lower incidence of cesarean delivery, lower frequency of tachysystole with changes in FHR, and non‐reassuring FHR.