Efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:2
|
作者
Pergialiotis, Vasilios [1 ]
Panagiotopoulos, Michail [1 ]
Constantinou, Therapon [2 ]
Vogiatzi Vokotopoulou, Lito [1 ]
Koumenis, Andreas [2 ]
Stavros, Sofoklis [1 ]
Voskos, Andreas [2 ]
Daskalakis, George [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Alexandra Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol 1, Lourou 2-4, Athens 11528, Greece
[2] Lab Expt Surg & Surg Res NS Christeas, Athens, Greece
关键词
Misoprostol; Oral; Sublingual; Induction of labour; Maternal morbidity; Neonatal morbidity; Systematic review; Meta-analysis; 25; MU-G; INTRAVAGINAL MISOPROSTOL; TERM; BLIND; ROUTES; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1007/s00404-022-06867-9
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective Misoprostol is a synthetic PGE(1) analogue that is used for induction of labour. Current guidelines support the use of doses that do not exceed 25 mcg in order to limit maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. The present meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and safety of oral compared to vaginally inserted misoprostol in terms of induction of labor and adverse peripartum outcomes. Methods We searched Medline, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception till April 2022. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of oral misoprostol (per os or sublingual) compared to vaginally inserted misoprostol. Effect sizes were calculated in R. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the possibility of small study effects, p-hacking. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis according to the dose of misoprostol was also investigated. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the risk of bias 2 tool. Quality of evidence for primary outcomes was evaluated under the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, ranging from very low to high. Results Overall, 57 studies were included that involved 10,975 parturient. Their risk of bias ranged between low-moderate. There were no differences among the routes of intake in terms of successful vaginal delivery within 24 h (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80) and cesarean section rates (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82, 1.04). Sublingual misoprostol was superior compared to vaginal misoprostol in reducing the interval from induction to delivery (MD - 1.11 h, 95% CI - 2.06, - 0.17). On the other hand, per os misoprostol was inferior compared to vaginal misoprostol in terms of this outcome (MD 3.45 h, 95% CI 1.85, 5.06). Maternal and neonatal morbidity was not affected by the route or dose of misoprostol. Conclusion The findings of our study suggest that oral misoprostol intake is equally safe to vaginal misoprostol in terms of inducing labor at term. Sublingual intake seems to outperform the per os and vaginal routes without increasing the accompanying morbidity. Increasing the dose of misoprostol does not seem to increase its efficacy.
引用
收藏
页码:727 / 775
页数:49
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Vasilios Pergialiotis
    Michail Panagiotopoulos
    Therapon Constantinou
    Lito Vogiatzi Vokotopoulou
    Andreas Koumenis
    Sofoklis Stavros
    Andreas Voskos
    George Daskalakis
    Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2023, 308 : 727 - 775
  • [2] Comparison of sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour: a systematic review
    Souza, A. S. R.
    Amorim, M. M. R.
    Feitosa, F. E. L.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2008, 115 (11) : 1340 - 1349
  • [3] Titrated oral misoprostol versus static regimen of oral misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Baradwan, Saeed
    Alshahrani, Majed Saeed
    Khadawardi, Khalid
    Badghish, Ehab
    Alkhamis, Waleed H.
    Mohamed, Doaa Fathy
    Kamal, Shaimaa Hanafy Moustafa
    Halim, Hala Waheed Abdel
    Alkholy, Eman A.
    Mohamed, Mariam Salah
    Mohamed, Asmaa Abdelaal
    Barakat, Shaimaa Ali
    Magdy, Hagar Abdelgawad
    Abd Elrehim, Eman Ibrahim
    Abdelhakim, Ahmed Mohamed
    Ragab, Bassem
    Elmazzaly, Saged Mohamed Metyli
    Ellaban, Mostafa
    Abbas, Ahmed M.
    Soror, Ghada Ibrahim
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2022, 42 (06) : 1653 - 1661
  • [4] Comparison of the efficacy and safety of sublingual misoprostol with that of vaginal misoprostol for labour induction at term
    Sheela, C. N.
    John, C.
    Preethi, R.
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2015, 35 (05) : 469 - 471
  • [5] Comparative study of efficacy and safety of oral versus vaginal misoprostol for induction or labour
    Deshmukh V.L.
    Yelikar K.A.
    Waso V.
    The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, 2013, 63 (5) : 321 - 324
  • [6] Safety and Efficacy of Oral Versus Vaginal Misoprostol Use for Induction of Labour at Term
    Abbassi, Razia Mustafa
    Sirichand, Pushpa
    Rizvi, Sadaf
    JCPSP-JOURNAL OF THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS PAKISTAN, 2008, 18 (10): : 625 - 629
  • [7] Efficacy and safety of oral vs vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming before hysteroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Abdelhakim, Ahmed M.
    Gadallah, Al-Hussein
    Abbas, Ahmed M.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2019, 243 : 111 - 119
  • [8] Balancing the efficacy and safety of misoprostol: a meta-analysis comparing 25 versus 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour
    McMaster, K.
    Sanchez-Ramos, L.
    Kaunitz, A. M.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2015, 122 (04) : 468 - 476
  • [9] Efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for labor induction at term: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Liu, Aihai
    Lv, Jieqiang
    Hu, Yue
    Lang, Junzhe
    Ma, Luhang
    Chen, Wenbing
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH, 2014, 40 (04) : 897 - 906
  • [10] EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF ORAL VERSUS VAGINAL MISOPROSTOL IN CERVICAL PRIMING BEFORE HYSTEROSCOPY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS.
    Abdelhakim, Ahmed M.
    Gadallah, Al-Hussein
    Abbas, Ahmed M.
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2019, 112 (03) : E413 - E413