Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction in nulliparous women at term
Objective: To compare the efficacy of oral misoprostol to vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction in nulliparous women. Study design: Admissions for labor induction from January 2008 to December 2010 were reviewed. Patients receiving oral misoprostol were compared with those receiving vaginal dinop...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of perinatology 2014-02, Vol.34 (2), p.95-99 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Objective:
To compare the efficacy of oral misoprostol to vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction in nulliparous women.
Study design:
Admissions for labor induction from January 2008 to December 2010 were reviewed. Patients receiving oral misoprostol were compared with those receiving vaginal dinoprostone. The primary outcome was time from induction agent administration to vaginal delivery. Secondary outcomes included vaginal delivery within 24 h, mode of delivery and maternal and fetal outcomes.
Result:
A total of 680 women were included: 483 (71%) received vaginal dinoprostone and 197 (29%) received oral misoprostol. Women who received oral misoprostol had a shorter interval to vaginal delivery (27.2 vs 21.9 h,
P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0743-8346 1476-5543 |
DOI: | 10.1038/jp.2013.133 |