Journal of Family and Reproductive Health 2012. 6(3):99-103.

A Comparison Between Sublingual Misoprostol and Intravenous Oxytocin for Inducing labor in Women with Term Pregnancy
Leila Habibi, Shirin Niroomanesh, Laleh Ghadirian

Abstract


Objective: In this study efficacy of sub lingual Misoprostol was examined in comparison to Oxytocin (I.V.) for inducing of labor in term pregnancy.
Materials and methods: Seventy patients were allocated by blocked randomization to Groups A (n=35, sub lingual Misoprostol 25 μg four hourly to maximum of 5 doses) and B (n=35, continuous Oxytocin infusion).
Results: Delivery active phase and total labor phase were shorter with sublingual Misoprostol in comparison to intravenous Oxytocin (p< 0.001) and the rate of cesarean section was lower in Misoprostol group (p<0.04) but delivery latent phase, meconium staining, uterine hypertonisity and apgar score (1&5 minute) were similar in two groups.
Conclusion: sublingual Misoprostol is better than intravenous Oxytocin for induction of labor at term.


Keywords


Sublingual Misoprostol; Oxytocin; Term-pregnancy; Labor induction

Full Text:

PDF

References


Cunningham FG, Leveno KL,Bloom SL, et al, eds.Williams Obstetrics. 23rd ed. New York,NY: McGraw- Hill; 2010: 500- 8, 544- 9.

Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M,Gülmezoglu AM, Souza JP, Taneepanichskul S, Ruyan P,Et al. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: the WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet 2010; 375:490-9.

Nigam A, Singh VK, Dubay P,Pandey K, Bhagoliwal A, Prakash A. Misoprostol vs.oxytocin for induction of labor at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004;86:398-400.

Kidanto HL,Kaguta MM, van Roosmalen J. Induction of labor with misoprostol or oxytocin in Tanzania. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007; 96: 30-1.

Eftekhari N, Motamedi B,Said H. A comparison of vaginal Misoprostol with intravenous Oxytocin for cervical ripening and labor induction. Acta medica iranica 2002; 40: 219 – 22.

Abdel-Aleem H. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour:RHLcommentary. The WHO Reproductive Health Library; Geneva: World Health Organization 2011.

Hofmeyr GJ,Gülmezoglu AM,Alfirevic Z. Misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999 ; 106:798-803.

Wing DA, Jones MM, Rahall A,Goodwin TM, Paul RH. A comparison of misoprostoland prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172:1804-10.

Crane JM,Young DC.Induction of labour with a favourable cervix and/or pre-labour rupture of membranes. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 17: 795-809.

Shetty A, Danielian P, Templeton A.Sublingual misoprostol for the induction oflabor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;186:72-6.

Bartusevicius A, Barcaite E, Krikstolaitis R, Gintautas V, Nadisauskiene R. Sublingual compared with vaginal misoprostol for labour induction at term: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2006 ;113:1431-7.

Niroomanesh SH,Talebzadeh noori Z, Hosseinpour M.A comparison of oral and sublingual Misoprostol for induction of labor.Journal of Babol University of medical science 2006; 8: 20-5.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.