Is mifepristone better than dinoprostone gel for induction of labor at term? Feto-maternal outcome in tertiary referral hospital
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20243937Keywords:
Cervical dilatation, Safe delivery, Cost-effectiveness, Dinoprostone gel, Mifepristone, Term gestation, Safety and efficacyAbstract
Background: The global increase in labor inductions has resulted in corresponding rise in failed inductions, instrumental deliveries and c-section rates significantly contributing to feto-maternal morbidity and mortality indicating critical need for better induction methods ensuring safer outcomes with minimal complications. This study compares 200mg oral mifepristone with 0.5mg intracervical dinoprostone gel for labor induction in latent phase at term gestation, focusing on safety, efficiency, complications and feto-maternal outcomes.
Methods: This was a prospective, randomized comparative study conducted at Gandhi Hospital, a tertiary healthcare teaching institute, from April to June 2024 admitted for safe confinement after 37 completed weeks of gestation in OBG department, divided into Group A and B (75 each) receiving 200mg oral mifepristone and 0.5mg intracervical dinoprostone gel respectively.
Results: The induction delivery interval was significantly shorter in Group B compared to Group A. However, the rate of successful induction of labor (IOL) or vaginal delivery was higher in Group A. Group B had higher rate of interventional deliveries including vacuum, forceps delivery or LSCS, with more maternal complications & NICU admissions.
Conclusions: It concludes that mifepristone is a better drug reducing the need for additional prostaglandins or other induction methods and has modest effect on cervical ripening for labor induction at term with lesser complications despite longer induction delivery interval compared to dinoprostone. Therefore, mifepristone is a safe, efficient and cost-effective drug offering easy patient compliance and application.
Metrics
References
Cunnigham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Spong CY, Dashe JS, Hoffman BL, Casey BM, Jeanne S. Sheffeld William Obstetrics. 24th ed. McGraw-Hill, New York, Chapter 37; 2014:668-671.
Hiralal K. DC Dutta’s text book of Obstetrics. 8th ed. Chapter 16, Chapter 35. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers;2018:203,601.
Cunnigham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, Williams LC. Williams Obstetrics. 22nd ed. McGraw Hill Professional; 2005:536.
Pathak A, Singh S, Singh S, Kumar R, Tyagi A. Comparative study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral Mifepristone versus intracervical Dinoprostone gel for induction of labour and their effects on fetomaternal outcome. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019;8(7):2678-82.
Speroff, L. and Fritz, M. The clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. 7th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia; 2005.
Deshmukh K, Patange RP. Comparative study between mifepristone and dinoprostone gel for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Int J Heal Sci. 2022;(I):4067-77.
Autry Blake M, Wadhwa Roopma. Mifepristone. In: StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024.
Athawale R, Acharya N, Samal S, Hariharan C. Effect of Mifepristone in cervical ripening for induction of labour. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2(1):35-8.
American college of obstetricians and gyneacologists. Induction of labor. Practice bulletin no. 10. Washington, D.C.: ACOG; 1999.
Sah MK, Padhye SM. Mifepristone versus intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel for cervical ripening in primigravid patients at term. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018;7(3):824-8.
Kumari S, Solanki V, Singh U, Mehrotra S. Comparative study of mifepristone with dinoprostone gel in induction of labor in full-term pregnancy: an open-label randomized controlled trial. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae. 2021;13(3):98-102.
Sailatha R, Famida AM, Chellaiyan VG, Vijayalakshmi K, Sathiya S, Renuka S.. Mifepristone: an alternate to dinoprostone in induction of labour. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(5):1880-4.
Yelikar K, Deshpande S, Deshpande R, Lone D. Safety and efficacy of oral mifepristone in preinduction cervical ripening and induction of labor in prolonged pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol of India. 2015;65(4):221-5.
Gupta A, Verma A, Madan I, Kashyap M. Efficacy and safety of oral mifepristone for cervical priming and induction of labor in term pregnancy. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul 1;7(7):2766.
Pal R, Khalua T. Comparative analysis of safety, efficacy and fetomaternal outcome in term live pregnancy for induction of labour with oral mifepristone and intracervical dinoprostone gel. IOSR J Dent Med Sci. 2018;17(4):77-81.
Hapangama D, James P Neilson. Mifepristone for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;2009(3):CD002865.
Hapangama D, Neilson JP. Mifepristone for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;2000(4):CD002865.
Gaikwad V, Mittal B, Puri M. Comparative analysis of safety, efficacy and fetomaternal outcome of Induction of labor with mifepristone versus intracervical dinoprostone gel. Res J Pharm Biol Chem Sci. 2014;5(2):611.
Baev O, Karapetian A, Babich D, Sukhikh G. Comparison of outpatient with inpatient mifepristone usage for cervical ripening: A randomised controlled trial. Euro J Obstetr Gynecol Reproduct Biol: X. 2023;18:100198.
Baev OR, Rumyantseva VP, Tysyachnyu OV. Outcomes of mifepristone usage for cervical ripening and induction of labour in full-term pregnancy. Randomized controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2017;217:144-9.
Priyanka, Shetty SS. The effect of mifepristone in induction of labour at term. MedPulse Int J Gynaecol. 2021;17(2): 32-5.
Wing DA, Guberman C, Fassett M. A randomized comparison of oral mifepristone to intravenous oxytocin for labour induction in women with prelabour rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 200;192(2):445-51.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
