Induction of labor in twin pregnancies with oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone - is it effective and safe?

被引:7
|
作者
Huber, Georgine [1 ]
Schuetz, Heike [1 ]
Seelbach-Goebel, Birgit [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Regensburg, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, St Hedwig Hosp, D-93053 Regensburg, Germany
来源
关键词
Dinoprostone; labor induction; misoprostol; time of delivery; twin gestation; INDICATED LATE-PRETERM; TERM; SINGLETON; EFFICACY; DELIVERY; WOMEN; RISK;
D O I
10.3109/14767058.2014.942629
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for the induction of labor in twin pregnancies. Methods: All twin pregnancies >= 34 weeks 0 days that were induced with either misoprostol or dinoprostone in St. Hedwig Hospital between 2002 and 2013 were included in this retrospective study. Length of induction, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: After identifying 186 twin mothers matching the inclusion criteria, 154 women were induced with misoprostol (group A) and 32 with dinoprostone (group B). There were no differences in demographic data between the groups. Rates of successful vaginal delivery (53.9% versus 56.3%) and length of induction to delivery (30.2 h versus 26.9 h) were also similar. There were slightly higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in group B (16.6% versus 10.8%), but without reaching statistical significance. Neonatal outcomes regarding umbilical artery pH <7.20 and one minute Apgar also were without significant differences. Conclusions: Study data indicate that oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone are similarly effective and safe for the induction of labor in twin gestations. Further trials with larger series are needed to confirm these results.
引用
收藏
页码:1043 / 1046
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Oral Misoprostol versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Tablets for Labor Induction
    Abu El Aish, Khaled Ibrahim
    Zourob, Haly Suliman
    CUKUROVA MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 38 (03): : 382 - 389
  • [2] Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction in nulliparous women at term
    Faucett, A. M.
    Daniels, K.
    Lee, H. C.
    El-Sayed, Y. Y.
    Blumenfeld, Y. J.
    JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2014, 34 (02) : 95 - 99
  • [3] Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction in nulliparous women at term
    A M Faucett
    K Daniels
    H C Lee
    Y Y EL-Sayed
    Y J Blumenfeld
    Journal of Perinatology, 2014, 34 : 95 - 99
  • [4] Effectiveness of dinoprostone gel, misoprostol vaginal insert and dinoprostone vaginal insert for induction of labour in twin pregnancies
    Gent, J.
    Oliver, E.
    Quigley, H.
    Sharp, A.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2023, 286 : 23 - 27
  • [5] Oral misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for induction of labor
    Langenegger, EJ
    Odendaal, HJ
    Grové, D
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2005, 88 (03) : 242 - 248
  • [6] Oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction:: A randomized controlled trial
    Dällenbach, P
    Boulvain, M
    Viardot, C
    Irion, O
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2003, 188 (01) : 162 - 167
  • [7] Comparison of vaginal misoprostol and oral misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone gel for labor induction at term
    Sheela, C. N.
    Mhaskar, Arun
    George, Shirley
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY OF INDIA, 2007, 57 (04): : 327 - 330
  • [8] Oral Misoprostol or vaginal Dinoprostone for labor induction? Randomized controlled trial
    Dallen-Bach, P
    Boulvain, M
    Viardot, C
    Irion, O
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2001, 185 (06) : S108 - S108
  • [9] Induction of Labor: oral versus vaginal Misoprostol
    Lorenz, Judith
    GEBURTSHILFE UND FRAUENHEILKUNDE, 2019, 79 (10) : 1008 - +
  • [10] Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for labor induction
    Hall, R
    Duarte-Gardea, M
    Harlass, F
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2002, 99 (06): : 1044 - 1048