A randomised comparative study of induction of labour with sublingual misoprostol 50 μg and oral misoprostol 50 μg in term patients

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20230389

Keywords:

Sublingual, Oral, Misoprostol, Labour induction

Abstract

Background: Current study was conducted to compare the efficacy of tab Misoprostol 50 microgram by oral and sublingual routes for induction of labour.

Methods: A randomised comparative study of induction of labour in 200 cases of pregnant women at term and were divided into two groups of 100 each for 50 µg Misoprostol for oral and sublingual route repeated 4 hourly either by sublingual or oral route until an adequate contraction pattern set in (establishment of 3 uterine contractions in a period of 10 minutes) or once the cervical dilatation reaches 4 cm, maximum up to 6 doses. The patients were monitored for maternal vital signs, progress of labour and foetal heart rate.

Results: In this study, 86% women delivered vaginally with sublingual misoprostol while 76% were delivered vaginally with oral administration. In the present study, no significant maternal side effects were noted in either group. 4% cases of neonates in sublingual group and 6% cases of neonates in oral group required NICU admission. No still birth or neonatal deaths were seen.

Conclusions: Our study shows that sublingual Misoprostol has better efficacy, shorter induction to delivery interval, requirement of fewer doses of misoprostol when compared to oral route.

References

Dutta DC. Textbook of gynecology. 7th ed. India: Jaypee; 2008:185-90.

Essential medicines: WHO model list (revised March 2005) explanatory notes. Available at: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2005/a87017_eng.pdf. Accessed on 6 December 2022.

Wears RL. New US food and drug administration labeling on cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101(5):1049-50.

Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Wears RL, Delke I, Gaudier FL. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;89:633-42.

Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Del Valle GO, Delke I, Schroeder PA, Briones DK. Labour induction with the prostaglandin E1 methyl analogue misoprostol versus oxytocin: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;81:332-6.

Varaklis K, Gumina R, Stubblefield PG. Randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol and intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term. Obstet Gynaecol. 1995;86:541-4.

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

Wing DA, Rahall A, Jones MM, Goodwin TM, Paul RH. Misoprostol: an effective agent for cervical ripening and labour induction. Am J Obstet Gynaecol. 1995;172:1811-6.

Elhassan EM, Nasr AM, Adam I. Sublingual compared with oral and vaginal misoprostol for labour induction. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2007;97:153-4.

Muzonzini G, Hofmeyr GJ. Buccal or sublingual misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;4: CD004221.

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

Shetty A, Mackie L, Danielian P, Rice P, Templeton A. Sublingual compared with oral misoprostol in term labour induction: a randomized controlled trial. BJOG. 2002;109:645-50.

Wolf SB, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Sublingual misoprostol for labour induction: a randomized clinical trial.Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:365.

Morris M, Bolnga JW, Verave O, Aipit J, Rero A, Laman M. Safety and effectiveness of oral misoprostol for induction of labour in a resource-limited setting: a dose escalation study. BMC Preg Childbirth. 2017; 17(1):298.

Kerr RS, Kumar N, Williams MJ, Cuthbert A, Aflaifel N, Haas DM, et al. Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;6:CD014484.

Downloads

Published

2023-02-22

How to Cite

Nimbark, N., Joshi, P. M., & Joshi, M. I. (2023). A randomised comparative study of induction of labour with sublingual misoprostol 50 μg and oral misoprostol 50 μg in term patients . International Journal of Basic & Clinical Pharmacology, 12(2), 211–215. https://doi.org/10.18203/2319-2003.ijbcp20230389

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles