Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of misoprostol, controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert and oxytocin for cervical ripening

  • Materno-fetal Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

We compared the safety and effectiveness of oxytocin, dinoprostone and misoprostol for cervical priming.

Study design

A total of 218 patients were enrolled to receive between one and three treatments according to physicians’ options. The end points were: (1) vaginal delivery or Bishop score ≥8 at the end of 12 h, (2) vaginal delivery by 12 h or difference ≥4 between the initial and 12th hour Bishop scores. Statistical analyses were performed with ANOVA, Krustal Wallis, Scheffe, χ², Fisher, Advanced χ², and Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. Tukey’s HSD was used as a post hoc test.

Results

Misoprostol showed statistical significance for the rate of vaginal delivery <12 h, ≥8 Bishop score at the end of 12 h, and cervical change of ≥4 Bishop scores within 12 h (p = 0.013).

Conclusions

Comparison between cases Bishop score <4 showed that misoprostol is more effective than dinoprostone and oxytocin. Considering Bishop score = 0 cases we calculated no statistical significance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hamid H (2000) Cervical ripenning and labor inductıon: clinical guidelines. Clin Obstet Gynecol 43:524–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Beebe LA, Rayburn WF, Beaty CM, Eberly KL, Stanley JR, Raybuni LA (2000) Indications for labor induction. Differences between university and community hospitals. J Reprod Med 45:463–475

    Google Scholar 

  3. Coonrod DV, Bay RC, Kishi GY (2000) The epidemiology of labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 18:1355–1362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Christensen FC, Tehranifar M, Gonzalez JL, Qualls CR, Rappaport VJ, Rayburn WF (2002) Randomized trial of concurrent oxytocin with a sustained-release dinoprostone vaginal insert for labor induction at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186:61–65

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sifakis S, Angelakis E, Avgoustinakis E et al (2007) A randomized comparison between intravaginal misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 for labor induction. Arch Gynecol Obstet 275:263–267

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Özkan S, Çalişkan E, Doğer E, Yücesoy İ, Özeren S, Vural B (2009) Comparative efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in labor induction at term: a randomized trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 280:19–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Benrubi GI (2000) Labor induction: historic perspectives. Clin Obstet Gynecol 43:429–432

    Google Scholar 

  8. Speert H (1980) Obstetrics and gynecology ın America: a history. Waverly Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  9. Stubbs TM (2000) Oxytocin for labor induction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 43:489–494

    Google Scholar 

  10. Leszczynska-Gorzelak B, Laskowska M, Oleszczuk J (2001) Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of misoprostol and prostoglandin E2 in the preinduction and induction of labor. Med Sci Monit 7(5):1023–1028

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Witter FR (2000) Prostaglandin E2 preparations for preinduction cervical ripening. Clin Obstet Gynecol 43:469–474

    Google Scholar 

  12. Calder AA, Mackenzie IZ (1997) Review of Propess _a controlled release dinoprostone (prostoglandin E2) pessary. J Obstet Gynecol 17(Suppl 2):s 53–s 67

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM (2000) Misoprostol for cervical ripenning and labor induction : a systematic reviewof the literature. Clin Obstet Gynecol 43:475–488

    Google Scholar 

  14. Surbek DV (2007) Misoprostol for labor induction in term pregnancy. Eur Clin Obstet Gynaecol 3:25–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Papanikolaou EG, Plachouras N, Drougia A et al (2004) Comparison of misoprostol and dinoprostone for elective induction of labour in nulliparous woman at full term: a randomized prospective study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2:70–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Philip A, Khan Q (1990) Grandmultiparity stil a risk? A retrospective study at Al. Corniche Hospital, Abu Ohab, UAE Emirates Med J 8:201–205

  17. Weaver SP, Cook J, Nashelsky J (2006) Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening in term pregnancy. Am Fam Physician 73(3):511–512 Feb 1

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Krishnamurthy MB, Srikantaiah AM (2006) Misoprostol alone versus a combination of dinoprostone and oxytocin for induction of labor. J Obstet Gynecol India 56(5):413–416

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Yanik A, gulumser C, Tosun M (2007) Ultrasonographic measurement of cervical length in predicting mode of delivery after oxytocin induction. Adv Ther 24(4):748–756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chelmow D, O’Brien B (2006) Postpartum haemorrhage: prevention. Clin Evid 15:1932–1950

    Google Scholar 

  21. Bartha JL, Comino-Delgado R, Garcia-Benasach F et al (2000) Oral misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction: a randomized comparison. Obstet Gynecol 96:465–469

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ferguson JE II, Head BH, Fred H et al (2002) Misoprostol versus low-dose oxytocin for cervical ripening: a prospective, randomized, double-masled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 187:273–280

    Google Scholar 

  23. Buser D, Mora G, Arias F (1997) A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfovarable cervices. Obstet Gynecol 89(4):581–584

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Fletcher HM, Mitchell S, Simeon D (1993) Intravaginal misoprostol as a cervical ripening agent. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 100:641–644

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Belfrage P, Smedvig E, Gjessing L et al (2000) A randomized prospective study of misoprostol and dinoproston for induction of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 79:1065–1068

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Bolnick JM, Velazquez MD, Gonzalez JL, Rappaport VJ, Mcllwain-Dunivan G, Rayburn WF (2004) Randomized trial between two active labor management protocols in the presence of an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 190(1):124–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Wears RL et al (1997) Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 89:633–642

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Chang YK, Chen WH, Yu MH, Liu HS (2003) Intracervical misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 for labor induction. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 80(1):23–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Dallenbach P, Boulvain M, Viardot C, Irion O (2003) Oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 188(1):162–167

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Wing DA, Ortiz-Omphroy G, Paul RH (1997) A comparison of intermitent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 177:612–618

    Google Scholar 

  31. Cleary GM, Wiswell TE (1998) Meconium-stained amniotic fluid and the meconium aspiration syndrome. An update. Pediatr Clin North Am 45(3):511–529

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Abdel-Aleem H. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour: RHL commentary (last revised: 1 August 2009). http://apps.who.int/rhl/pregnancy_childbirth/induction/CD000941_abdelaleemh_com/en/index.html. The WHO Reproductive Health Library; Geneva: World Health Organization

  33. Balci O, Mahmoud AS, Acar A, Colakoglu MC (2010) Comparison of induction of labor with vaginal misoprostol plus oxytocin versus oxytocin alone in term primigravidae. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 110(1):64–67

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bhattacharyya SK, Mukherji J, Kamilya GS, Ray S, Hazra A (2006) Two regimens of vaginal misoprostol in second trimester termination of pregnancy: a prospective randomised trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 85(12):1458–1462

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

We declare that we have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Perinatology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mustafa Kemal University Faculty of Medicine, Antakya, Hatay, Turkey

    Dilek B. Silfeler

  2. Division of Perinatology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zeynep Kamil Women and Children Diseases Education and Research Hospital, Uskudar, Istanbul, Turkey

    Bulent Tandogan, Habibe Ayvaci, Ilter Yenidede & Vedat Dayicioglu

  3. Hassa Public Hospital, Antakya, Hatay, Turkey

    Ibrahim Silfeler

Authors
  1. Dilek B. Silfeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bulent Tandogan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Habibe Ayvaci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ibrahim Silfeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ilter Yenidede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vedat Dayicioglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dilek B. Silfeler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Silfeler, D.B., Tandogan, B., Ayvaci, H. et al. A comparison of misoprostol, controlled-release dinoprostone vaginal insert and oxytocin for cervical ripening. Arch Gynecol Obstet 284, 1331–1337 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-011-1844-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-011-1844-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation