Premium
Oral misoprostol versus intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel for active management of premature rupture of membranes at term
Author(s) -
Nagpal Monika B.,
Raghunandan Chitra,
Saili Arvind
Publication year - 2009
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 - 10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.03.014
Subject(s) - misoprostol , prom , medicine , oxytocin , premature rupture of membranes , obstetrics , prostaglandin e2 , anesthesia , labor induction , cervix , pregnancy , abortion , gestational age , genetics , cancer , biology
Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of oral misoprostol with intracervical prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) gel for the active management of premature rupture of membranes (PROM) at term. Methods Women with pregnancies between 37 and 42 weeks presenting with PROM at term and a Bishop score of 5 or less were randomly assigned to receive either a 4‐hourly oral dose of 50 µg of misoprostol up to a maximum of 3 doses or 2 applications of intracervical PGE2 gel at a 6‐hour interval. Oxytocin was given if labor had not started after 12 hours. Results Twenty women in the misoprostol group (n = 31) delivered within 12 hours compared with 5 in the PGE2 group (n = 30) ( P < 0.001). The induction‐to‐delivery interval in the misoprostol group was shorter than in the PGE2 gel group (615 min vs 1070 min; P < 0.001). The mode of delivery was comparable between the 2 groups ( P = 0.821). Abnormalities in uterine contractions and neonatal outcomes were also comparable. The requirement for oxytocin was lower and patient satisfaction was better in the misoprostol group. Conclusion Oral misoprostol is a safe and efficacious alternative to intracervical PGE2 gel in the active management of PROM at term.