Randomized clinical trial between hourly titrated oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor

Predictive Factors for the Success of Vaginal Dinoprostone for the Induction of Labour

Objective

To evaluate factors predictive of the success of a slow-release dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening.

Methods

This retrospective study included 187 women who received dinoprostone vaginal inserts for cervical ripening. The participants were divided into two groups: the transvaginal delivery group (n = 87) and cesarean section termination group (n = 100). The correlation between the parameters present before cervical ripening with dinoprostone slow release and its success, as well as complications and adverse outcomes, was analyzed. Cesarean section predictors and area under the curve (AUC) were compared between the two Groups.

Results

There were statistical differences between the two groups in body mass index (BMI), height, cervical Bishop score, cephalic position, time of medication use, and fetal head position at the time of medication use (P<0.05). The optimal thresholds for identifying cesarean section in dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening were 162.5 for height (AUC = 0.61), 10.65 cm for amniotic fluid index (AUC = 0.6), S-2.5 for cephalic position (AUC = 0.61), 5.5 for bishop score of cervix (AUC = 0.65). The height, amniotic fluid index, cephalic position, and Bishop score of the cervix were included in the same model. The AUC value of the combined model was higher than the AUC value of the single factor.

Conclusion

The combined model was a better predictor of cesarean section in dinoprostone vaginal inserts for cervical ripening and labor induction. The success of cervical ripening with a dinoprostone slow-release vaginal insert can be predicted by the factors that can be recognized at admission.

Safety of misoprostol vs dinoprostone for induction of labor: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacological agents such as prostaglandins (dinoprostone and misoprostol) are commonly used to reduce the duration of labor and promote vaginal delivery. However, key safety considerations with its use include an increased risk of uterine rupture, tachysystole and hyperstimulation of pregnant women, which could potentially lead to a non-reassuring fetal heart rate and to fetal hypoxemia. The aim of this systematic review was to assess maternal and fetal outcomes between misoprostol group (PGE1) and dinoprostone group (PGE2) STUDY DESIGN: We search on MEDLINE (PubMed), CINHAL (EBSCOhost), EMBASE, Scopus (Ovid), CENTRAL (January 1, 1998, to December 31, 2022). Patients were eligible if they presented at greater than 36 weeks gestation with an indication for induction of labor and a single live cephalic fetus. We conducted a meta-analysis of data for both primary (cesarean section rate, instrumental deliveries rate, tachysystole, uterine rupture, post-partum haemorrage; chorionamiositis) and secondary outcomes (Apgar at 5 min <7, meconium-stained liquor, NICU admission, infant death) using odds-ratio (OR) as a measure of effect-size. Risk of bias assessment was performed with RoB-I. We performed statistical analyses using Cochrane RevMan version 5.4 software.

RESULTS

We found 39 RCTs comparing the outcomes of interest between misoprostol and dinoprostone. The pooled effect showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of cesarean section rate [OR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.84-1.05], instrumental deliveries rate [OR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.90-1.19; p = 0.62], tachysystole [OR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.91-1.60; p = 0.19], post-partum hemorrhage [OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.62-1.15p = 0.30], chorioamnionitis [OR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.76-1.17p = 0.59], Apgar at 5 min < 7 [OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.61-1.12, p = 0.21], meconium-stained liquor [OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.97-1.27p = 0.59], NICU admission group [OR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.77-1.09], infant death [OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.22-1.44]. After performing a sub-group analysis based on the type of prostaglandins administrations (oral, vaginal gel, vaginal pessary), results did not change substantially.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrate that misoprostol and dinoprostone appear to have a similar safety profile.

Results of Induction of Labor with Prostaglandins E1 and E2 (The RIPE Study): A Real-World Data Analysis of Obstetrical Effectiveness and Clinical Outcomes of Pharmacological Induction of Labor with Vaginal Inserts

Despite extensive knowledge of the mechanisms responsible for childbirth, the course of labor induction is often unpredictable. Therefore, labor induction protocols using prostaglandin analogs have been developed and tested to assess their effectiveness in labor induction unequivocally. A total of 402 women were collected into two groups-receiving vaginal Misoprostol or vaginal Dinoprostone for induction of labor (IOL). Then, the patients were compared in groups depending on the agent they received and their gestational age. Most patients delivered within 48 h, and most of these patients had vaginal parturition. Patients who received the Dinoprostone vaginal insert required statistically significantly more oxytocin administration than patients who received the Misoprostol vaginal insert. Patients who received the Misoprostol vaginal insert used anesthesia during labor statistically more often. Patients who received Misoprostol vaginal inserts had a statistically significantly shorter time to delivery than those with Dinoprostone vaginal inserts. The prevalence of hyperstimulation was similar in all groups and remained low. Vaginal Misoprostol-based IOL is characterized by a shortened time to delivery irrespective of the parturition type, and a lower need for oxytocin augmentation, but also by an increased demand for intrapartum analgesia administration. A vaginal Dinoprostone-based IOL protocol might be considered a more harmonious and desirable option in modern perinatal care.

The Efficacy of Misoprostol Vaginal Inserts for Induction of Labor in Women with Very Unfavorable Cervices

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a misoprostol vaginal insert as an induction-of-labor (IOL) agent in women with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 2) in achieving vaginal delivery (VD) within 48 h, depending on the gestational week, with particular emphasis on the cesarean section (CS) percentage, intrapartum analgesia application and possible side effects, such as tachysystole ratio.

METHODS

In this retrospective observational study involving 6000 screened pregnant patients, 190 women (3%) fulfilled the study inclusion criteria and underwent vaginal misoprostol IOL. The pregnant women were collected into three groups: patients who delivered at up to 37 weeks of gestation (<37 Group)-42 patients; patients who delivered between 37 and 41 weeks of gestation (37-41 Group)-76 patients; and patients who delivered after 41 weeks of gestation (41+ Group)-72 patients. The outcomes included time to delivery and mode of delivery, rate of tachysystole, need for intrapartum analgesia, and need for oxytocin augmentation.

RESULTS

Most of the patients delivered vaginally (54.8% in <37 Group vs. 57.9% in 37-41 Group vs. 61.1% in 41+ Group). A total of 89.5% (170/190) of patients delivered within 48 h (<37 Group-78.6% vs. 37-41 Group-89.5% vs. 41+ Group-95.8%). Statistical significance was demonstrated for the increased rate of vaginal deliveries and shortened time to delivery in the 41+ weeks group (p = 0.0026 and p = 0.0038). The indications for cesarean section were as follows: abnormal CTG pattern vs. lack of labor progression: 42.1% vs. 57.9% in <37 Group, 59.4% vs. 40.6% in 37-41 Group and 71.4% vs. 28.6% in 41+ Group. Statistical significance was demonstrated for the increased rate of abnormal CTG patterns as cesarean section indications in the 41+ Group (p = 0.0019). The need for oxytocin augmentation in each group was: 35.7% in <37 Group vs. 19.7% in 37-41 Group vs. 11.1% in 41+ Group. Statistical significance was shown for decreased need for oxytocin augmentation in +41 Group (p = 0.0016). The need for intrapartum anesthesia, depending on the group, was: 78.6% in <37 Group vs. 82.9% in 37-41 Group vs. 83.3% in 41+ Group. Statistical significance was demonstrated for increased need for intrapartum anesthesia application during labor in +41 Group (p = 0.0018). The prevalence of hyperstimulation was similar in all three groups (4.8% vs. 7.9% vs. 5.6% p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The misoprostol vaginal regimen for IOL used in our study is effective in achieving vaginal delivery within 48 h. In post-term women, the use of this regimen is characterized by an increased rate of vaginal deliveries, a shorter time to delivery and a lower need for oxytocin.

Prediction of an effective cervical ripenning in the induction of labour using vaginal dinoprostone

To develop a predictive model for successful cervical ripening in women that undergo induction of labour by means of a vaginal prostaglandin slow-release delivery system (Propess®).  Prospective observational study on 204 women that required induction of labour between February 2019 and May 2020 at "La Mancha Centro" hospital in Alcázar de San Juan, Spain. The main variable studied was effective cervical ripening (Bishop score > 6). Using multivariate analysis and binary logistic regression, we created three initial predictive models (model A: Bishop Score + Ultrasound cervical length + clinical variables (estimated fetal weight, premature rupture of membranes and body mass index)); model B: Ultrasound cervical lenght + clinical variables; and model C: Bishop score + clinical variables) to predict effective cervical ripening. All three predictive models obtained (A, B and C) presented good predictive capabilities, with an area under the ROC curve ≥ 0.76. Predictive model C, composed of the variables: gestational age (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.18-2.03, p = 0.002), premature rupture of membranes (OR 3.21 95% CI 1.34-7.70, p = 0.09) body mass index (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.98, p = 0.012), estimated fetal weight (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00, p = 0.068) and Bishop score (OR 1.49 95% CI 1.18-1.81, p = 0.001), is presented as the model of choice with an area under the ROC curve of 0.76 (95% CI 0.70-0.83, p < 0.001). A predictive model composed of the variables: gestational age, premature rupture of membranes, body mass index, estimated fetal weight and Bishop score upon admission presents good capabilities in predicting successful cervical ripening following administration of prostaglandins. This tool could be useful in making clinical decisions with regard to induction of labour.

Mode of delivery after labor induction with vaginal dinoprostone versus oral misoprostol for women with unfavorable cervix at term

OBJECTIVE

To compare the delivery mode after labor induction with 10 mg vaginal dinoprostone insert versus oral misoprostol 50 µg/4 h for women with an unfavorable cervix.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study comparing the before/after introduction of oral misoprostol for labor induction, conducted at the Saint-Étienne University Hospital on a cohort of 396 women with a Bishop score <6. One hundred and twelve women (28.3%) were treated with a 10 mg vaginal dinoprostone insert versus 284 (71.7%) with oral misoprostol 50 µg/4 h. The primary outcome was the cesarean section rate.

RESULTS

Labor induction with vaginal dinoprostone was independently associated with an increased rate of cesarean sections compared to oral misoprostol (aOR = 2.44; CI95% from 1.35 to 4.40; p = 0.003). The use of vaginal dinoprostone increased the induction rate during more than 48 h (18.8% versus 9.9%; p = 0.02), and the occurrence of fetal heart rate changes (34.8% versus 21.1%; p = 0.005). The maternofetal morbidity was similar.

CONCLUSION

Labor induction with vaginal dinoprostone was independently associated with an increased rate of cesarean sections compared to oral misoprostol in women with an unfavorable cervix.

Titrated oral misoprostol versus static regimen of oral misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of titrated oral misoprostol versus static oral misoprostol for labour induction. We searched for the available randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, ISI web of science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We included RCTs compared titrated oral misoprostol versus static regimen of oral misoprostol during labour induction. Our main outcomes were vaginal and caesarean delivery rates, uterine tachysystole, misoprostol side effects, and neonatal adverse events. Three RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total number of 360 patients. The vaginal delivery rate did not significantly differ between both groups (p = 0.49). Titrated oral misoprostol was associated with significant increase in the caesarean delivery rate compared to static oral misoprostol (p = 0.04). Moreover, titrated oral misoprostol led to significant increase in the uterine tachysystole and misoprostol side effects (p = 0.01 & p = 0.003, respectively). There were no differences among both groups regarding different neonatal adverse events. In conclusion, titrated oral misoprostol increases the incidence of caesarean delivery, uterine tachysystole, and misoprostol side effects with a similar vaginal delivery rate compared to static dose misoprostol. Thus, static oral misoprostol should be used instead of titrated oral misoprostol during labour induction. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Different studies have evaluated titrated oral misoprostol administration for induction of labour and proved their efficacy in comparison with other induction methods. However, there is controversy among the published studies between titrated oral misoprostol and static oral misoprostol during induction of labour. A recent study concluded that hourly titrated misoprostol and static oral misoprostol are equally safe and effective when utilised for induction of labour with no fear of any adverse events. However, another study recommended static oral misoprostol administration for labour induction as it was linked to a lower caesarean section incidence, fewer drug side effects, and decline in complication rates in comparison with titrated oral misoprostol.What the results of this study add? Titrated oral misoprostol increases the incidence of caesarean delivery, uterine tachysystole, and misoprostol side effects with a similar vaginal delivery rate compared to static dose misoprostol.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Static oral misoprostol should be used instead of titrated oral misoprostol during labour induction. More future trials are required to confirm our findings.

Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Misoprostol given orally is a commonly used labour induction method. Our Cochrane Review is restricted to studies with low-dose misoprostol (initially ≤ 50 µg), as higher doses pose unacceptably high risks of uterine hyperstimulation.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of low-dose oral misoprostol for labour induction in women with a viable fetus in the third trimester of pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov,  the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (14 February 2021) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing low-dose oral misoprostol (initial dose ≤ 50 µg) versus placebo, vaginal dinoprostone, vaginal misoprostol, oxytocin, or mechanical methods; or comparing oral misoprostol protocols (one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly; 20 µg to 25 µg versus 50 µg; or 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Using Covidence, two review authors independently screened reports, extracted trial data, and performed quality assessments. Our primary outcomes were vaginal birth within 24 hours, caesarean section, and hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 61 trials involving 20,026 women. GRADE assessments ranged from moderate- to very low-certainty evidence, with downgrading decisions based on imprecision, inconsistency, and study limitations. Oral misoprostol versus placebo/no treatment (four trials; 594 women) Oral misoprostol may make little to no difference in the rate of caesarean section (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 1.11; 4 trials; 594 women; moderate-certainty evidence), while its effect on uterine hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 5.15, 95% CI 0.25 to 105.31; 3 trials; 495 women; very low-certainty evidence). Vaginal births within 24 hours was not reported. In all trials, oxytocin could be commenced after 12 to 24 hours and all women had pre-labour ruptured membranes. Oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone (13 trials; 9676 women) Oral misoprostol probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.90; 13 trials, 9676 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analysis indicated that 10 µg to 25 µg (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87; 9 trials; 8652 women) may differ from 50 µg (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.34; 4 trials; 1024 women) for caesarean section. Oral misoprostol may decrease vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.00; 10 trials; 8983 women; low-certainty evidence) and hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59; 11 trials; 9084 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus vaginal misoprostol (33 trials; 6110 women) Oral use may result in fewer vaginal births within 24 hours (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95; 16 trials, 3451 women; low-certainty evidence), and less hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.92, 25 trials, 4857 women, low-certainty evidence), with subgroup analysis suggesting that 10 µg to 25 µg orally (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 trials, 957 women) may be superior to 50 µg orally (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.11; 19 trials; 3900 women). Oral misoprostol probably does not increase caesarean sections overall (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.16; 32 trials; 5914 women; low-certainty evidence) but likely results in fewer caesareans for foetal distress (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.99; 24 trials, 4775 women). Oral misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin (6 trials; 737 women, 200 with ruptured membranes) Misoprostol may make little or no difference to vaginal births within 24 hours (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.33; 3 trials; 466 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably results in fewer caesarean sections (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.90; 6 trials; 737 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect on hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes is uncertain (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.19 to 2.26; 3 trials, 331 women; very low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol versus mechanical methods (6 trials; 2993 women) Six trials compared oral misoprostol to transcervical Foley catheter. Misoprostol may increase vaginal birth within 24 hours (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.79; 4 trials; 1044 women; low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the risk of caesarean section (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; 6 trials; 2993 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.21; 4 trials; 2828 women; low-certainty evidence). Oral misoprostol one- to two-hourly versus four- to six-hourly (1 trial; 64 women) The evidence on hourly titration was very uncertain due to the low numbers reported. Oral misoprostol 20 µg hourly titrated versus 25 µg two-hourly static (2 trials; 296 women) The difference in regimen may have little or no effect on the rate of vaginal births in 24 hours (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16; low-certainty evidence). The evidence is of very low certainty for all other reported outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose oral misoprostol is probably associated with fewer caesarean sections (and therefore more vaginal births) than vaginal dinoprostone, and lower rates of hyperstimulation with foetal heart rate changes. However, time to birth may be increased, as seen by a reduced number of vaginal births within 24 hours. Compared to transcervical Foley catheter, low-dose oral misoprostol is associated with fewer caesarean sections, but equivalent rates of hyperstimulation. Low-dose misoprostol given orally rather than vaginally is probably associated with similar rates of vaginal birth, although rates may be lower within the first 24 hours. However, there is likely less hyperstimulation with foetal heart changes, and fewer caesarean sections performed due to foetal distress. The best available evidence suggests that low-dose oral misoprostol probably has many benefits over other methods for labour induction. This review supports the use of low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour, and demonstrates the lower risks of hyperstimulation than when misoprostol is given vaginally. More trials are needed to establish the optimum oral misoprostol regimen, but these findings suggest that a starting dose of 25 µg may offer a good balance of efficacy and safety.

Safety of COVID-19 vaccines, their components or their platforms for pregnant women: A rapid review

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women with COVID-19 are at an increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness as well as adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Many countries are vaccinating or considering vaccinating pregnant women with limited available data about the safety of this strategy. Early identification of safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines, including their components, or their technological platforms is therefore urgently needed.

METHODS

We conducted a rapid systematic review, as the first phase of an ongoing full systematic review, to evaluate the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women, including their components, and their technological platforms (whole virus, protein, viral vector or nucleic acid) used in other vaccines, following the Cochrane methods and the PRISMA statement for reporting (PROSPERO-CRD42021234185).We searched literature databases, COVID-19 and pregnancy registries from inception February 2021 without time or language restriction and explored the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews retrieved. We selected studies of any methodological design that included at least 50 pregnant women or pregnant animals exposed to the vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG in August 2020 or their components or platforms included in the COVID-19 vaccines, and evaluated adverse events during pregnancy and the neonatal period.Pairs of reviewers independently selected studies through the COVIDENCE web software and performed the data extraction through a previously piloted online extraction form. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

We identified 6768 records, 256 potentially eligible studies were assessed by full-text, and 37 clinical and non-clinical studies (38 reports, involving 2,397,715 pregnant women and 56 pregnant animals) and 12 pregnancy registries were included.Most studies (89%) were conducted in high-income countries. The most frequent study design was cohort studies (n=21), followed by surveillance studies, randomized controlled trials, and registry analyses. Most studies (76%) allowed comparisons between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant women (n=25) or animals (n=3) and reported exposures during the three trimesters of pregnancy.The most frequent exposure was to AS03 adjuvant in the context of A/H1N1 pandemic influenza vaccines (n=24), followed by aluminum-based adjuvants (n=11). Aluminum phosphate was used in Respiratory Syncytial Virus Fusion candidate vaccines (n=3) and Tdap vaccines (n=3). Different aluminum-based adjuvants were used in hepatitis vaccines. The replication-deficient simian adenovirus ChAdOx1 was used for a Rift Valley fever vaccine. Only one study reported exposure to messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines that also used lipid nanoparticles. Except for one preliminary report about A/H1N1 influenza vaccination (adjuvant AS03) - corrected by the authors in a more thorough analysis, all studies concluded that there were no safety concerns.

CONCLUSION

This rapid review found no evidence of pregnancy-associated safety concerns of COVID-19 vaccines that were selected for review by the COVAX MIWG or of their components or platforms when used in other vaccines. However, the need for further data on several vaccine platforms and components is warranted given their novelty. Our findings support current WHO guidelines recommending that pregnant women may consider receiving COVID-19 vaccines, particularly if they are at high risk of exposure or have comorbidities that enhance the risk of severe disease.

Labor induction with prostaglandin E1 versus E2: a comparison of outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To compare the peripartum outcomes when labor is induced with prostaglandins E₁ versus E₂.

METHODOLOGY

The Consortium of Safe Labor database was utilized. Women with non-anomalous singletons >24 weeks gestation undergoing induction were analyzed. The primary endpoint was a composite adverse maternal outcome with a composite adverse neonatal outcome as our secondary outcome.

RESULTS

Of the 228,438 births within the database, 8229 (10.8%) met inclusion criteria with 4703 (55.7%) receiving PGE₁, and 3741 (44.3%), PGE₂. The rate of vaginal delivery was similar between both. Composite adverse maternal outcome, was more likely among the prostaglandin E₁: 7.2% vs. 1.5% (aOR 4.20; 95% CI 3.02-5.85); similar trend observed with composite adverse neonatal outcome rates: 4.6% vs. 1.4% (aOR 1.69; 95% CI 1.14-2.50).

CONCLUSION

Utilization of prostaglandin E₁, compared to E_2, was associated with an increased likelihood of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

A comparison between induction of labor with 3 methods of titrated oral misoprostol, constant dose of oral misoprostol and Foley catheter with extra amniotic saline infusion (EASI), in women with unfavorable cervix

Background: Different methods of cervical ripening and induction of labor have been used in the cases of unfavorable cervix with different levels of success, but no method has been found to be the best option. The purpose of the present study was to find the effects and side effects of three different methods of cervical ripening and induction of labor. These three methods were oral titrated misoprostol, constant dose of oral misoprostol and Foley catheter with extra-amniotic saline infusion.

Methods: This clinical trial was performed on women with unfavorable cervix who had been admitted in Akbarabadi Teaching Hospital for induction of labor and had bishop score of less than six; between March 2014- March 2015. The eligible women were assigned into three groups. In titrated oral misoprostol group (n=33), titrated solution of misoprostol, and in oral misoprostol group (n=33), 50µg oral misoprostol every four hours and in Foley catheter group (n=50), Foley catheter with extra-amniotic saline infusion were administered. The main outcome was the number of vaginal deliveries during the first 24 hours. In addition, number of cesarean deliveries and adverse effects were compared between the three groups. The obtained data were analyzed using SPSS 18 software. Data analysis was performed according to the intention to treat principle. Chi-square test, Fisher Exact test, Student ttest, and Mann-Whitney U test, were used for comparing data. P-value≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: The three groups did not have any significant difference according to maternal age, gestational age at the time of admission, gravidity, parity, and primary Bishop Score. There was no significant difference between the three groups for the main outcome, which was vaginal delivery during the first 24 hours (p=0.887). There was no significant difference between the three groups according to hypertonicity, uterine hyperstimulation, meconium passage, non-reassuring fetal heart rate, neonatal Apgar score in minutes one and 5, and mean duration of beginning the intervention up to delivery. However, uterine tachysystole and NICU admission were more in the group to whom the titrated solution of misoprostol was administered (p=0.002 and p=0.037 respectively). The number of cesarean deliveries due to failure to progress was higher in the EASI group. However, EASI group showed the least number of none-reassuring fetal heart rate between the three groups. Meconium passage was more in the titrated misoprostol group, but the difference was not significant.

Conclusion: All three methods are appropriate methods for induction of labor in the cases of unfavorable cervix; and choosing each method depends on the expertise of labor staff, accessibility to the medications, cost, and taking care for monitoring the patients and adverse effects.

Efficacy comparison of titrated oral solution of misoprostol and intravenous oxytocin on labour induction in women with full-term pregnancy

A double-blind randomised trial was conducted on women with gestational age of 40-42 weeks of pregnancy and Bishop score of more than 5. The first group received oxytocin infusion and the second group received a titrated oral solution of misoprostol. Then, the two groups were compared by the primary outcome (the number of deliveries in the first 24 hours of intervention). The two groups did not have any significant difference in maternal and gestational age at the time of intervention, primary Bishop score, parity and neonatal weight. The number of deliveries in the first 24 hours was greater in the misoprostol group. Duration of onset of intervention to proper contractions was longer in the misoprostol group. However, the number of deliveries between 6-12 hours, 12-18 hours and 18-24 hours after induction was greater in the misoprostol group. The incidence of tachysystole and meconium was greater in the misoprostol group.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Labour induction is widely used where the continuation of pregnancy might be dangerous for the mother or the baby. Of the various methods used for induction, misoprostol which is a prostaglandin E1 analogue has been reviewed more in recent years. Misoprostol has various routes of administration but in most studies only vaginal administration has been evaluated, leaving us with limited data about oral administration.What do the results of this study add? Oral misoprostol is a suitable method for labour induction and can be used as an alternative to oxytocin.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Misoprostol is not expensive, has a long shelf life, accessible in underdeveloped countries and rural areas and has several routes of administrations such as oral, sublingual and vaginal. Despite the fact that the oral route of misoprostol has a fast absorption and easier administration, there are relatively few studies assessing the the use of the oral route of misoprostol. Misoprostol is a suitable method for Labour induction and it has the potentials of being used as an alternative for oxytocin, however, the optimum dosages, the preferred route of administration, the maximum dose, the maximum time for administration, and maternal and neonatal safety should be studied more.

Oral misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a randomized controlled trial of hourly titrated and 2 hourly static oral misoprostol solution

Background: Misoprostol has been shown to be effective in induction of labor (IOL) with different dosages and routes of administration.Objectives: This study compared the efficacy and safety of hourly titrated and 2-hourly static low dose oral misoprostol for IOL in Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital, Ado-Ekiti.Methods: One hundred fifty women with singleton pregnancy at term admitted for IOL were randomized into the two groups. Oxytocin augmentation was done as necessary. The primary outcome is rate of vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Data were analyzed using SPSS.Results: Vaginal delivery was achieved within 24 hours in 40 (67.8%) women who received hourly titrated-doses oral misoprostol and 42 (70.0%) women who received 2-hourly static-dose of oral misoprostol, p > .05. The rate of vaginal delivery, oxytocin augmentation, induction delivery time and cesarean section rate were similar in both groups, p > .05. Occurrence of uterine hyperactivity did not differ significantly among the women (p > .05) and no cases of uterine rupture were recorded. There were no adverse neonatal outcomes.Conclusions: The hourly titrated oral misoprostol is as effective and safe as the 2-hourly static oral misoprostol for IOL. Both can be utilized in IOL without the fear of adverse outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of administering oral misoprostol by titration compared to vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial

Background

Among the various methods available, the administration of prostaglandins is the most effective for inducing labour in women with an unfavourable cervix. Recent studies have compared treatment with various titrated doses of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol or dinoprostone, indicating that the use of an escalating dose of an oral misoprostol solution is associated with a lower rate of caesarean sections and a better safety profile. The objective of this study is to assess which of these three therapeutic options (oral or vaginal misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone) achieves the highest rate of vaginal delivery within the first 24 h of drug administration.

Methods

An open-label randomised controlled trial will be conducted in Araba University Hospital (Spain). Women at ≥41 weeks of pregnancy requiring elective induction of labour who meet the selection criteria will be randomly allocated to one of three groups: 1) vaginal dinoprostone (delivered via a controlled-release vaginal insert containing 10 mg of dinoprostone, for up to 24 h); 2) vaginal misoprostol (25 μg of vaginal misoprostol every 4 h up to a maximum of 24 h); and 3) oral misoprostol (titrated doses of 20 to 60 μg of misoprostol following a 3 h on + 1 h off regimen up to a maximum of 24 h). Both intention-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis will be performed.

Discussion

The proposed study seeks to gather evidence on which of these three therapeutic options achieves the highest rate of vaginal delivery with the best safety profile, to enable obstetricians to use the most effective and safe option for their patients.

Trial registration

NCT02902653 Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02902653 (7th September 2016).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2132-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Challenges and Limitations of Clinical Trials on Labor Induction: A Review of the Literature

Induction of labor is a common obstetric procedure performed in nearly a quarter of all deliveries in the United States. Pharmacological (prostaglandins, oxytocin) and/or mechanical methods (balloon catheters) are commonly used for labor induction; however, there is ongoing debate as to which method is the safest and most effective. This narrative review discusses key limitations of published trials on labor induction, including the lack of well-designed randomized controlled trials directly comparing specific methods of induction, heterogeneous trial populations, and wide variation in the protocols used and outcomes reported. Furthermore, the majority of published trials were underpowered to detect significant differences in the most clinically relevant efficacy and safety outcomes (e.g., cesarean delivery, neonatal mortality). By identifying the limitations of labor induction trials, we hope to highlight the importance of quality published data to better inform guidelines and drive evidence-based treatment decisions.

Prediction of the efficacy of dinoprostone slow release vaginal insert (Propess) for cervical ripening: A prospective cohort study

AIM

To evaluate factors predictive of the success of dinoprostone slow release vaginal insert for cervical ripening.

METHODS

A total of 169 women who underwent cervical ripening with dinoprostone slow release vaginal insert were included in the study cohort. The correlation between parameters present before cervical ripening with dinoprostone slow release and its success, as well as complications and adverse outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Dinoprostone slow release vaginal insert was successful in achieving vaginal delivery in 148 of 169 (87.6%), while sufficient ripening was achieved in 140 (83%) cases. Factors associated with successful vaginal delivery were multiparity and younger gestational age at delivery. Factors predictive of the success of cervical ripening with dinoprostone slow release vaginal insert were lower body mass index (BMI), higher parity and perceived contractions prior to insertion. Intrauterine growth restriction was associated with a significant risk for dinoprostone insert removal. Neonatal outcomes were similar in cases of successful or failed ripening.

CONCLUSION

The success of cervical ripening with dinoprostone slow release vaginal insert can be predicted by factors that can be recognized at admission.

Which method is best for the induction of labour? A systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

More than 150,000 pregnant women in England and Wales have their labour induced each year. Multiple pharmacological, mechanical and complementary methods are available to induce labour.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of labour induction methods and, data permitting, effects in different clinical subgroups.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic review using Cochrane methods. The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register was searched (March 2014). This contains over 22,000 reports of controlled trials (published from 1923 onwards) retrieved from weekly searches of OVID MEDLINE (1966 to current); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library); EMBASE (1982 to current); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1984 to current); ClinicalTrials.gov; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Portal; and hand-searching of relevant conference proceedings and journals. We included randomised controlled trials examining interventions to induce labour compared with placebo, no treatment or other interventions in women eligible for third-trimester induction. We included outcomes relating to efficacy, safety and acceptability to women. In addition, for the economic analysis we searched the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Economic Evaluations Databases, NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment database. We carried out a network meta-analysis (NMA) using all of the available evidence, both direct and indirect, to produce estimates of the relative effects of each treatment compared with others in a network. We developed a de novo decision tree model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of various methods. The costs included were the intervention and other hospital costs incurred (price year 2012-13). We reviewed the literature to identify preference-based utilities for the health-related outcomes in the model. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, expected costs, utilities and net benefit. We represent uncertainty in the optimal intervention using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

We identified 1190 studies; 611 were eligible for inclusion. The interventions most likely to achieve vaginal delivery (VD) within 24 hours were intravenous oxytocin with amniotomy [posterior rank 2; 95% credible intervals (CrIs) 1 to 9] and higher-dose (≥ 50 µg) vaginal misoprostol (rank 3; 95% CrI 1 to 6). Compared with placebo, several treatments reduced the odds of caesarean section, but we observed considerable uncertainty in treatment rankings. For uterine hyperstimulation, double-balloon catheter had the highest probability of being among the best three treatments, whereas vaginal misoprostol (≥ 50 µg) was most likely to increase the odds of excessive uterine activity. For other safety outcomes there were insufficient data or there was too much uncertainty to identify which treatments performed 'best'. Few studies collected information on women's views. Owing to incomplete reporting of the VD within 24 hours outcome, the cost-effectiveness analysis could compare only 20 interventions. The analysis suggested that most interventions have similar utility and differ mainly in cost. With a caveat of considerable uncertainty, titrated (low-dose) misoprostol solution and buccal/sublingual misoprostol had the highest likelihood of being cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

There was considerable uncertainty in findings and there were insufficient data for some planned subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, misoprostol and oxytocin with amniotomy (for women with favourable cervix) is more successful than other agents in achieving VD within 24 hours. The ranking according to safety of different methods was less clear. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that titrated (low-dose) oral misoprostol solution resulted in the highest utility, whereas buccal/sublingual misoprostol had the lowest cost. There was a high degree of uncertainty as to the most cost-effective intervention.

FUTURE WORK

Future trials should be powered to detect a method that is more cost-effective than misoprostol solution and report outcomes included in this NMA.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005116.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

[Induction of labour at term with misoprostol: the experience of a Tunisian maternity ward]

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol for term labour induction. A prospective study conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology B of hospital Charles Nicolle, Tunis, over a period of 4 months. The group of subjects, selected to represent the population of interest, were pregnant patients at term undergoing cervical ripening. Patients received 50 mcg vaginal misoprostol every 12 hours. The parameters studied were: contractile abnormalities, abnormalities of fetal heart rate (FHR), mode of delivery, delayed delivery and neonatal status. 44 patients underwent cervical ripening with misoprostol. The average term was 40 WA. Nulliparous rate was 23/44 (52%). Vaginal birth rate was 31/44 (70.4%). 84% of patients received a single dose of misoprostol. FHR abnormalities were observed in 14/44 (32%). The rates of meconium-stained amniotic fluid was 12/44 (27%). Apgar score of less than 7 at 5 minutes was found in 7/44 (16%). A case of uterine rupture occurred in a primipara after a single dose of misoprostol. Our results are disappointing due to the occurrence of 1 uterine rupture and of 1 significant neonatal morbidity. Other multicentre prospective studies will be useful to better ensure the effectiveness but primarily the safety of low-dose misoprostol for induction of labour at term.

Cervical ripening agents in the second trimester of pregnancy in women with a scarred uterus: a systematic review and metaanalysis of observational studies

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and metaanalysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of cervical ripening agents in the second trimester of pregnancy in patients with previous cesarean delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

Data sources were PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, Google Scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov (1983 through 2015). Eligibility criteria were cohort or cross-sectional studies that reported on efficacy and safety of cervical ripening agents in patients with previous cesarean delivery. Efficacy was determined based on the proportion of patients achieving vaginal delivery and vaginal delivery within 24 hours following administration of a cervical ripening agent. Safety was assessed by the risk of uterine rupture and complications such as retained placental products, blood transfusion requirement, and endometritis, when available, as secondary outcomes. Of the 176 studies identified, 38 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 17 studies were descriptive and 21 studies compared the efficacy and safety of cervical ripening agents between patients with previous cesarean and those with no previous cesarean. From included studies, we abstracted data on cervical ripening agents and estimated the pooled risk differences and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. To account for between-study heterogeneity, we estimated risk ratios based on underlying random effects analyses. Publication bias was assessed via funnel plots and across-study heterogeneity was assessed based on the I(2) measure.

RESULTS

The most commonly used agent was PGE1. In descriptive studies, PGE1 was associated with a vaginal delivery rate of 96.8%, of which 76.3% occurred within 24 hours, uterine rupture in 0.8%, retained placenta in 10.8%, and endometritis in 3.9% in patients with ≥1 cesarean. In comparative studies, the use of PGE1, PGE2, and mechanical methods (laminaria and dilation and curettage) were equally efficacious in achieving vaginal delivery between patients with and without prior cesarean (risk ratio, 0.99, and 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.00; risk ratio, 1.00, and 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.02; and risk ratio, 1.00, and 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.01; respectively). In patients with history of ≥1 cesarean the use of PGE1 was associated with higher risk of uterine rupture (risk ratio, 6.57; 95% confidence interval, 2.21-19.52) and retained placenta (risk ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.43) compared to women without a prior cesarean. However, the risk of uterine rupture among women with history of only 1 cesarean (0.47%) was not statistically significant (risk ratio, 2.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-14.32), whereas among those with history of ≥2 cesareans (2.5%) was increased as compared to those with no previous cesarean (0.08%) (risk ratio, 17.55; 95% confidence interval, 3.00-102.8). Funnel plots did not demonstrate any clear evidence of publication bias. Across-study heterogeneity ranged from 0-81%.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and metaanalysis provides evidence that PGE1, PGE2, and mechanical methods are efficacious for achieving vaginal delivery in women with previous cesarean delivery. The use of prostaglandin PGE1 in the second trimester was not associated with significantly increased risk for uterine rupture among women with only 1 cesarean; however, this risk was substantially increased among women with ≥2 cesareans although the absolute risk appeared to be relatively small.

Induction of Labor in Post-Term Nulliparous and Parous Women - Potential Advantages of Misoprostol over Dinoprostone

INTRODUCTION

We undertook a prospective cohort study to compare the effectiveness and safety of 50 µg misoprostol versus 3 mg dinoprostone in two vaginal doses 6 hours apart, followed if necessary by oxytocin for labor induction in low-risk post-term (> 40 weeks) pregnancies with unfavorable cervix (Bishop score ≤ 6).

METHODS

Labor induction and subsequent management were conducted using a standardized protocol. The primary outcome of the study was labor induction rate. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, time interval from induction to delivery, maternal complications and neonatal outcome.

RESULTS

107 patients received misoprostol (Group A) and 99 patients received dinoprostone (Group B). Compared with group A, more women in Group B needed a second vaginal dose of prostaglandin or oxytocin infusion in order to proceed to labor (21.5 vs. 43.4 %; p = 0.01). Misoprostol alone as a single or double vaginal dose was more effective than dinoprostone alone in inducing labor without oxytocin administration (85.0 vs. 50.4 %; p = 0.04). Overall, the rate of successful induction of labor did not differ between groups (91.6 vs. 85.8 %; p = 0.75). Vaginal delivery, operative vaginal delivery and Caesarean section rates were not significantly different. Time interval from induction to delivery however, was shorter for Group A (median 11 hours vs. 14.1 hours; p < 0.001). Though emergency Caesarean section due to fetal distress was more frequent in Group A (16.8 vs. 4.0 %; p = 0.007), low Apgar scores < 7 and NICU admissions did not differ significantly. Maternal complications, mostly not serious, were higher in Group A (31.8 vs. 2.0, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Misoprostol is a more effective agent than dinoprost in post-term pregnancy for labor induction with few maternal adverse effects.

Comparison of Vaginal and Oral Doses of Misoprostol for Labour Induction in Post-Term Pregnancies

INTRODUCTION

Considering maternal complications, it is preferred to induce labour after 40 weeks. Labour induction is a procedure used to stimulate uterine contractions during pregnancy before the beginning of the labour.

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour in post-term pregnancies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This double blind clinical-trial study was performed on 180 post-term pregnant women who were admitted to the labour ward of Besat Hospital Sanandaj, Iran in 2013-2014. Participants were equally divided into three groups using block randomization method. The induction was performed for the first group with 100 μg of oral misoprostol, for the second group with 50 μg of oral misoprostol, and for the third group with 25 μg of vaginal misoprostol. Vaginal examination and FHR was done before repeating each dose to determine Bishop Score. Induction time with misoprostol to the start of uterine contractions, induction time to delivery, and mode of delivery, systolic tachycardia, hyper stimulation and fetal outcomes were studied as well.

RESULTS

First minute Apgar scores and medication dosage of the study groups were significantly different (p=0.0001). But labour induction, induction frequency, mode of delivery, complications, and 5 minutes Apgar score in the groups had no significant difference (p>0.05). The risk of fetal distress and neonatal hospitalization of the groups were statistically significant (p=0. 02). There was no significant difference between the three groups in terms of mean time interval from the administration of misoprostol to the start of uterine contractions (labour induction), the time interval from the start of uterine contractions to delivery and taking misoprostol to delivery. From the administration of misoprostol to start of the uterine contractions the mean difference between time intervals in the three groups were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings it can be concluded that prescribing 100μg oral misoprostol is effective than 50 μg oral or 25 μg vaginal misoprostol in terms of induction time, maternal and neonatal outcomes in post- term pregnancy. However, the best dose and route should be decided according to evidence based information.

Failed induction of labor

Induction of labor will affect almost a quarter of all pregnancies, but historically there has been no generally accepted definition of failed induction of labor. Only recently have studies analyzed the lengths of latent labor that are associated with successful labor induction ending in a vaginal delivery, and recommendations for uniformity in the diagnosis of failed induction have largely resulted from this data. This review assesses the most recent and inclusive definition for failed induction, risk factors associated with failure, complications, and special populations that may be at risk for a failed induction.

Efficacy of intra-cervical misoprostol in the management of early pregnancy failure

The aim of this prospective study was to assess the efficacy of intra-cervical misoprostol in the management of early pregnancy failure. Twenty women with early pregnancy failure received intra-cervical misoprostol via an endometrial sampling cannula. The first dose was 50 μg of misoprostol dissolved in 5 ml of normal saline. The administration was repeated after 12 h if there was no vaginal bleeding or pain. Nine (45%) women received 1 dose and 11 (55%) women received 2 doses of intra-cervical misoprostol. Abortion within 24 h occurred in 16 (80%) women, and complete abortion was achieved in 14 (70%) cases. Two women with incomplete abortion were managed with 600 μg of misoprostol orally (1 case) and surgical intervention (1 case). The mean time interval between the first dose and the abortion was 10.6 ± 6.3 h. Two women did not respond within 24 h of treatment initiation, 1 woman withdrew consent after the first treatment, and 1 woman developed heavy vaginal bleeding after the first dose and underwent surgical management. Intra-cervical misoprostol is a promising method of medical treatment of early pregnancy failure. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to validate its safety and efficacy.

Oral misoprostol for induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Misoprostol is an orally active prostaglandin. In most countries misoprostol is not licensed for labour induction, but its use is common because it is cheap and heat stable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the use of oral misoprostol for labour induction in women with a viable fetus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (17 January 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing oral misoprostol versus placebo or other methods, given to women with a viable fetus for labour induction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial data, using centrally-designed data sheets.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall there were 76 trials (14,412) women) which were of mixed quality.In nine trials comparing oral misoprostol with placebo (1109 women), women using oral misoprostol were more likely to give birth vaginally within 24 hours (risk ratio (RR) 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 0.49; one trial; 96 women), need less oxytocin (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.49; seven trials; 933 women) and have a lower caesarean section rate (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.95; eight trials; 1029 women).In 12 trials comparing oral misoprostol with vaginal dinoprostone (3859 women), women given oral misoprostol were less likely to need a caesarean section (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99; 11 trials; 3592 women). There was some evidence that they had slower inductions, but there were no other statistically significant differences.Nine trials (1282 women) compared oral misoprostol with intravenous oxytocin. The caesarean section rate was significantly lower in women who received oral misoprostol (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.98; nine trials; 1282 women), but they had increased rates of meconium-stained liquor (RR 1.65, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.60; seven trials; 1172 women).Thirty-seven trials (6417 women) compared oral and vaginal misoprostol and found no statistically significant difference in the primary outcomes of serious neonatal morbidity/death or serious maternal morbidity or death. The results for vaginal birth not achieved in 24 hours, uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate (FHR) changes, and caesarean section were highly heterogenous - for uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes this was related to dosage with lower rates in those with lower doses of oral misoprostol. However, there were fewer babies born with a low Apgar score in the oral group (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.82; 19 trials; 4009 babies) and a decrease in postpartum haemorrhage (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.95; 10 trials; 1478 women). However, the oral misoprostol group had an increase in meconium-stained liquor (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.44; 24 trials; 3634 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral misoprostol as an induction agent is effective at achieving vaginal birth. It is more effective than placebo, as effective as vaginal misoprostol and results in fewer caesarean sections than vaginal dinoprostone or oxytocin.Where misoprostol remains unlicensed for the induction of labour, many practitioners will prefer to use a licensed product like dinoprostone. If using oral misoprostol, the evidence suggests that the dose should be 20 to 25 mcg in solution. Given that safety is the primary concern, the evidence supports the use of oral regimens over vaginal regimens. This is especially important in situations where the risk of ascending infection is high and the lack of staff means that women cannot be intensely monitored.