Maternal and neonatal outcome after the use of low dose sublingual 25 µg misoprostol for labour induction in women with term pregnancy

Sumitra Gajraj; Anupam Kapur

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20213843

Authors

Sumitra Gajraj Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Military Hospital Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
Anupam Kapur INHS Sanjivani, Naval Base Kochi, Kerala, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20213843

Keywords:

Bishop’s score, Caesarean section, Labour, Neonatal outcome, Sublingual misoprostol

Abstract

Background: Aim of this study was to assess the maternal and fetal/neonatal outcome after the use of low dose (25 µg) misoprostol for labour induction in women with term pregnancy (gestational age >37 weeks POG) with a live foetus.

Methods: The prospective interventional study was designed at the department of obstetrics and gynaecology of a tertiary health care hospital, with a sample size of 150 pregnant ladies who had to undergo induction of labour, were selected depending on the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data was analysed using SPSS 18. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data. Qualitative variables were presented as frequencies and percentage.

Results: About 41% (61 patients) of the total study population was in the age group of 26 to 30 years with only two patients aged >35 years of age. The study group comprised of 88 primigravida (59%) and 62 multigravida (41%). The most common indication for induction of labour in my study was post-dated pregnancy (47%) followed by PROM (22%).

Conclusions: The use of low dose (25 µg) misoprostol sublingually is definitely very effective in cervical ripening and induction of labour in term pregnancies particularly in those with poor Bishops score. There was no significant neonatal or maternal morbidity associated with induction of labour with low dose sublingual misoprotol.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Karim SMM, Trussele RR, Patel RC, Hillier K. Response of pregnant human uterus to prostaglandin F2 alpha induction of labour. BMJ. 1968;IV:621-3.

Sanchez-Ramos LU, Kaunitz AM, Del Valle GO, Delke IS, Schroeder PA, Briones DK. Labour induction with the prostaglandin E1 methyl analogue misoprostol versus oxytocin: A randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 1993;81:332-6.

Agarwal N, Gupta A, Kriplani A. Six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labour induction. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2003;29:147-51.

Crane JM, Butler B, Young DC, Hannah ME. Misoprostol compared with prostaglandin E2 for labour induction in women at term with intact membranes and unfavourable cervix: a systematic review. BGOG. 2006;113:1366-76.

Bartusevicius A, Barcaite E, Nadisauskiene R. Oral, vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2005;91:2-9.

Shetty A, Danielian P, Templeton A. Sublingual misoprostol for the induction of labour at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186:72-6.

Lo TK, Lau WL, Wong KS. Sublingual misoprostol compared to artificial rupture of membranes plus oxytocin infusion for labour induction in nulliparous women with favourable cervix at term. Hong Kong Med J. 2006;12:345-50.

ACOG Committee Opinion. American College of Obstetrician and Gynecologist. New U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling on Cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101:1049-50.

Hissane EM, El Karroumim M, Mikou F, Ghazli M, Matar N. Misoprostol sublingually versus vaginally for labour induction at term: a randomized study. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology “B”, Averoes Hospital, Casablanca, Morocco. Res Obstet Gynecol. 2012;1(3):27-9.

Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Robinson JS. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour at term: randomized controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332(7540):509-13.

Kundodyiwa TW, Alfirevic Z, Weeks AD. Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review. Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;113:374-83.

Majid N, Nasir F, Akhtar T, Fatima H. Misoprostol: an effective agent for labour induction in full term parous women. Med Channel. 2009;15(2):51-4.

Utman N, Akhtar S, Jamshid A. Usefulness of 100 microgram misoprostol in term gravid patients regarding labour,fetal and maternal outcome. JPMI. 2007;21(02):136-40.

Eroglu D, Oktem M, Yanik F. Labour induction at term: a comparison of the effects of 50 µg and 25 µg vaginal misoprostol. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2007;34:102-5.

Bugalho A, Bique C, Machungo F, Faundes A. Low-dose vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor with a live fetus. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1995;49(2):149-55.

Cecatti JG, Tedesco RP, Pires HM. Effectiveness and safety of a new vaginal misoprostol product specifically labelled for cervical ripening and labour induction. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85:706-11.

Has R, Batukan C, Ermis H. Comparison of 25 and 50 µg vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction of cervical ripening and labour induction. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2005;59:155-61.

Khoury AN, Zhou QP, Gorenberg DM. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of two different doses of misoprostol suppositories with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labour induction. J Matern Fetal Med. 2001;10:186-9.

Bartusevicius A, Barcaite E, Krikstolaitis R, Gintautas V, Nadisauskiene R. Sublingual compared with vaginal misoprostol for labour induction at term: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2006;113:1431-7.

Hofmeyr GJ, Gülmezoglu AM, Pileggi C. Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;10:CD000941.

Srisomboon J, Singchai S. A comparison between 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for labour induction. J Med Assoc Thai. 1998;81:779-83.

Caliskan E, Bodur H, Ozeren S. Misoprostol 50 microg sublingually versus vaginally for labour induction at term: a randomized study. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2005;59:155-61.