Induction of labour in nulliparous women- quick or slow: a cohort study comparing slow-release vaginal insert with low-dose misoprostol oral tablets

被引:13
|
作者
Eriksson, Axelina [1 ,2 ]
Jeppesen, Sarah [3 ]
Krebs, Lone [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Holbaek Cent Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Holbaek, Denmark
[2] Hvidovre Univ Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Kettegaard 30, DK-2650 Hvidovre, Denmark
[3] Naestved Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Naestved, Denmark
[4] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Clin Med, Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
Induced; Induction; Labour; Misoprostol; Angusta; Misodel; Nulliparous; 3RD STAGE; TERM;
D O I
10.1186/s12884-020-2770-0
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BackgroundThis study was undertaken with the objective of comparing efficacy and safety for two different regimens using misoprostol for induction of labour.MethodsThe study was set in two different hospitals in the region of Zeeland, Denmark, and designed as a prospective cohort study. Nulliparous women with unripe cervix, eligible for vaginal delivery and medical induction of labour were included. Exclusion criteria were a previous uterine scar, suspicion of growth restriction of the fetus and prelabour rupture of membranes.One department used 25 mcg oral misoprostol tablets and the other department used 200 mcg slow-release misoprostol vaginal insert, for induction of labour.Primary outcomes were predefined as frequency of cesarean section, tachysystole and delivery within 24h. Secondary outcomes were: time from induction to delivery, use of additional methods for induction, postpartum hemorrhage, anal sphincter rupture, epidural, pyrexia (rectal temperature> 38.5 degrees C), prolonged rupture of membranes, and use of tocolysis.ResultsNo significant differences in women achieving vaginal delivery was found. However, a significantly increased risk of tachysystole for the vaginal administration route was observed; 28.4% compared with 2.3%. There were no events of serious neonatal asphyxia. Half of the women induced with vaginal insert delivered within 24h, compared with 16.8% of the women induced with oral misoprostol.ConclusionsInduction with vaginal slow-release misoprostol leads to quicker delivery with an increased risk of tachysystole but with similar perinatal outcomes and rates of cesarean sections. Low-dose oral misoprostol appears to be safe, however it leads to an increased use of secondary methods and a tendency of more intrapartum pyrexia.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02693587 on February 262,016.EudraCT number 2020-000366-42 on 23 January 2020, retrospectively registered.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 15 条
  • [1] Induction of labour in nulliparous women- quick or slow: a cohort study comparing slow-release vaginal insert with low-dose misoprostol oral tablets
    Axelina Eriksson
    Sarah Jeppesen
    Lone Krebs
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 20
  • [2] A comparison of misoprostol vaginal insert and misoprostol vaginal tablets for induction of labor in nulliparous women: a retrospective cohort study
    Marsdal, Kjersti Engen
    Sorbye, Ingvil Krarup
    Gaudernack, Lise C.
    Lukasse, Mirjam
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2018, 18 : 11
  • [3] A comparison of misoprostol vaginal insert and misoprostol vaginal tablets for induction of labor in nulliparous women: a retrospective cohort study
    Kjersti Engen Marsdal
    Ingvil Krarup Sørbye
    Lise C. Gaudernack
    Mirjam Lukasse
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18
  • [4] Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study
    Daniele Bolla
    Saskia Vanessa Weissleder
    Anda-Petronela Radan
    Maria Luisa Gasparri
    Luigi Raio
    Martin Müller
    Daniel Surbek
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18
  • [5] Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study
    Bolla, Daniele
    Weissleder, Saskia Vanessa
    Radan, Anda-Petronela
    Gasparri, Maria Luisa
    Raio, Luigi
    Mueller, Martin
    Surbek, Daniel
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2018, 18
  • [6] Slow-release vaginal insert of misoprostol versus orally administrated solution of misoprostol for the induction of labour in primiparous term pregnant women: a randomised controlled trial
    Wallstrom, T.
    Strandberg, M.
    Gemzell-Danielsson, K.
    Pilo, C.
    Jarnbert-Pettersson, H.
    Friman-Mathiasson, M.
    Wiberg-Itzel, E.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2019, 126 (09) : 1148 - 1155
  • [8] Misoprostol dose selection in a controlled-release vaginal insert for induction of labor in nulliparous women
    Castañeda, CS
    Puente, JCI
    Ochoa, RAL
    Plasse, TF
    Powers, BL
    Rayburn, WF
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2005, 193 (03) : 1071 - 1075
  • [9] Slow-release vaginal insert of misoprostol versus orally administrated solution of misoprostol for the induction of labour in primiparous term pregnant women: a randomised controlled trial (vol 126, pg 1148, 2019)
    Wallstrom, T.
    Strandberg, M.
    Gemzell-Danielsson, K.
    Pilo, C.
    Jarnbert-Petterson, H.
    Friman-Mathiasson, M.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2019, 126 (11) : 1405 - 1405
  • [10] Comparing induction of labour practice; use of either a vaginal PGE2 slow-release pessary or vaginal tablet
    Thurlwell, Z.
    Hamilton, S.
    Rice, C.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2013, 120 : 453 - 454