HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cheng, S.-Y. Articles by Lee, J.-C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cheng, S.-Y. Articles by Lee, J.-C. Related Collections General obstetrics Labor and operative obstetrics

Titrated Oral Compared With Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction

A Randomized Controlled Trial

From the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, China Medical University Beigang, Hospital, Beigang, Yunlin; and China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of titrated oral misoprostol and vaginal misoprostol for labor induction.

METHODS: Women between 34 and 42 weeks of gestation with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score less than or equal to 6) and an indication for labor induction were randomLy assigned to receive titrated oral or vaginal misoprostol. The titrated oral misoprostol group received a basal unit of 20 mL misoprostol solution (1 mcg/mL) every 1 hour for four doses and then were titrated against individual uterine response. The vaginal group received 25 mcg every 4 hours until attaining a more favorable cervix. Vaginal delivery within 12 hours was the primary outcome. The data were analyzed by intention-to-treat.

RESULTS: Titrated oral misoprostol was given to 101 (48.8%) women and vaginal misoprostol to 106 (51.2%) women. Completed vaginal delivery occurred within 12 hours in 75 (74.3%) women in the titrated oral group and 27 (25.5%) women in the vaginal group (relative risk [RR] 8.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.52–15.76). The incidence of hyperstimulation was 0.0% in the titrated oral group compared with 11.3% in the vaginal group (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01–0.61). Although more women experienced nausea (10.9%) in the titrated oral group (RR 27.07, 95% CI 1.57–465.70), fewer infants had Apgar scores of less than 7 at 1 minute in the titrated oral group than in the vaginal group (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01–0.76).

CONCLUSION: Titrated oral misoprostol is associated with a lower incidence of uterine hyperstimulation and a lower cesarean delivery rate than vaginal misoprostol for labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervix.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00529295

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S.-Y. Cheng Titrated Oral Compared With Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction: a Randomized Controlled Trial Obstet. Gynecol., June 1, 2008; 111(6): 1445 - 1445. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. H. Nassar, R. Abdallah, and I. M. Usta Titrated Oral Compared With Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction: a Randomized Controlled Trial Obstet. Gynecol., June 1, 2008; 111(6): 1444 - 1445. [Full Text] [PDF]