A Comparison of Misoprostol and Dinoprostone Gel for Induction and Cervical Ripening

Sandeep Raidu

doi:10.55489/njmr.12032022907

Authors

Sandeep Raidu Malla Reddy Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55489/njmr.12032022907

Keywords:

Misoprostol, Dinoprostone, Induction of labour, Cervical Ripening

Abstract

Introduction: Labour induction at term is a universal conventional obstetric interference with an objective to stimulate uterine contractions artificially to attain a spontaneous vaginal delivery. The current study was aimed to compare the efficacy and safety profile of low dose vaginal Misoprostol with Dinoprostone gel for induction of labour in term pregnancies with unfavorable cervix and intact membranes.

Methodology: This Randomized Controlled Trial was conducted among pregnant women with term pregnancy with obstetrical or medical indication for induction of labour after institutional ethical committee approval. A detailed history, complete physical examination and investigations were done for all patients.

Result: Misoprostol and Dinoprostone gel are equally effective inducing agents. Both are equally effective in Primigravida and Multigravida. Failure of induction rate for Misoprostol and Dinoprostone was statistically not significant. The need of Oxytocin augmentation, maternal complication rate, NICU admission rate, caesarean section rate and occurrence of meconium-stained liquor are statistically not significant in both the study groups. Our study was unable to demonstrate superiority of any single drug compared to other. Only the difference is cost, induction with

Conclusion: considering the easy to preserve and administer, we recommend use of Misoprostol as a safe, effective, cheaper, and more convenient drug for induction of labour.

References

Spanish Society (2013) Spanish Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics SEGO's Birth Induction Protocol.

WHO recommendations for Induction of labour. World Health Organization 2011. Available from: whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241501156_eng.pdf.

Pollnow DM, Broekhuizen FF. Randomized, double-blind trial of prostaglandin E2 intravaginal gel versus low-dose oxytocin for cervical ripening before induction of labour. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 1996 Jun 1;174(6):1910-6. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70228-4 PMid:8678158

Hofmeyr GJ, Gülmezoglu AM, Pileggi C. Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2010(10). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000941.pub2

Pierce S, Bakker R, Myers DA, Edwards RK. Clinical Insights for Cervical Ripening and Labour Induction Using Prostaglandins. American Journal of Perinatology Reports. 2018 Oct;8(04):e307-14. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1675351 PMid:30377555 PMCid:PMC6205862

Krause E, Malorgio S, Kuhn A, Schmid C, Baumann M, Surbek D. Off-label use of misoprostol for labour induction: a nation-wide survey in Switzerland. European journal of obstet-rics & gynecology and reproductive biology. 2011 Dec 1;159(2):324-8. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.09.013 PMid:21958953

Annex WH. 19th WHO Model List of Essential Medicines. WHO: Geneva, Switzerland. 2015.

ACOG committee opinion. New US Food and drug admin-istration labeling of cytotec (misoprostol) use in pregnancy. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2003;82:137-38. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7292(03)00248-0 PMid:12834952

ACOG Practice Bulletin number 107, August 2009. Induction of Labour. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(2):386-97. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b48ef5 PMid:19623003

Patil P, Patil A. Misoprostol v/s Cerviprime Gel for Induction of Labour. Int J Med Res Rev 2013; 1(2):63-70. Doi: https://doi.org/10.17511/ijmrr.2013.i02.04

Malathia J, Sunitaa V. Comparison of Misoprostol and Dinoprostone Gel for Induction in Prelabor Rupture of Mem-branes at Term. J ClinGynecol Obstet. 2015;4(4):302-306. Doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jcgo321w

Agarwal N, Gupta,A, Kriplani ,Bhatla NP. Six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intra cervical Dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labour induction.JObstet and Gynecology Res 2003;29(3):147-51. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1341-8076.2003.00091.x PMid:12841697

Murthy BK et al. Misoprostol alone versus a combination of Dinoprostone and Oxytocin for induction of labour. J ObstetGynec India 2006;56(5):413-416.

Neiger R. Greaves PC. Comparison between Vaginal Miso-prostol and Cervical Dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labour induction. Tenn Med. 2001;94(1):25-7.

Wing DA, Gaffaney CA. Vaginal misoprostol administration for cervical ripening and labour induction. Clin Obstet Gy-necol. 2006;49:627-641. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003081-200609000-00021 PMid:16885668

Barrilleaux PS, Bofill JA, et al. Cervical ripening and induction of labor with misoprostol, dinoprostone gel, and a Foley catheter: A randomized trial of 3 techniques. Am J ObstetGy-necol 2002; 186(6): 1124-9. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2002.123821 PMid:12066084