Role of titrated low dose oral misoprostol solution in induction of labour
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20160583Keywords:
Misoprostol, Oxytocin, Dose, Induction, LabourAbstract
Background: Oxytocin is a time tested drug used for induction of labour. However, certain disadvantages associated with oxytocin can be countered if misoprostol is used for the same purpose. But excessive uterine contractility has been a cause of concern with misoprostol use. Based on pharmacological profile of misoprostol, this study was carried out using oral misoprostol solution for induction of labour in low dose, titrated according to uterine contractions and the outcomes were compared with oxytocin.
Methods: A total of 157 women fulfilling inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in the study and cervical ripening was carried out. After the cervix became favorable (Bishop Score >6), a total of 54 women received titrated oral low dose misoprostol (group 1), and 52 received intravenous oxytocin (group 2). Both the drugs were compared in terms of labour outcomes, efficacy, adverse effects and neonatal outcomes.
Results: There was no significant difference in the mean induction to onset of labour interval and mean induction to delivery interval in group 1 and group 2. Also, there was no significant difference in the modes of delivery and adverse effects and neonatal outcomes in both the groups, except group 1 had a significantly lower incidence of neonates with Apgar score <7 at 5 min.
Conclusions: For induction of labour in women with term gestation after cervical priming, low dose oral misoprostol solution in titrated doses and intravenous oxytocin were found to be comparable with each other in terms of labour outcomes, efficacy and adverse effects.
References
Tessier F, Dansereau J. A double-blind randomised controlled trial comparing oral misoprostol to vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at or near term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;176:S111.
Windrim R, Bennett K, Mundle W, Young DC. Oral administration of misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;89:392-7.
Adair CD, Weeks JW, Barrileaux PS, Philbert L, Edward MS, Lewis DF. Labor induction with oral versus vaginal misoprostol: a randomized double-blind trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;178:S93.
Kwon JS, Davies GA, MacKenzie VP. A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a randomized trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;108:23-6.
Wing DA, Ham D, Paul RH. A comparison of orally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180:1155-60.
Toppozada MK, Anwar MYM, Hassan HA, El-Gazaerly WS. Oral or vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 1997;56:135-9.
Zeiman M, Fong SK, Benowitz NL, Banskter D, Darney PD. Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:88-92.
Ho M, Cheng SY, Li TC. Titrated oral misoprostol solution compared with intravenous oxytocin for labor augmentation: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(3):612-8.
Aalami-Harandi R, Karamali M, Moeini A. Induction of labor with titrated oral misoprostol solution versus oxytocin in term pregnancy: randomized controlled trial. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2013;35(2):60-5.
Cheng SY, Hsue CS, Hwang GH, Chen W, Li TC. Comparison of labor induction with titrated oral misoprostol solution between nulliparous and multiparous women. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2010;36(1):72-8.
Cheng SY, Chen TC. Pilot study of labor induction with titrated oral misoprostol. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;45:225-9.
Sweha A, Hacker TW, Nuovo J. Interpretation of electronic fetal heart rate during labor. Am Fam Physician. 1999;59:2487-500.
