[Pharmacology of misoprostol (pharmacokinetic data, adverse effects and teratogenic effects)]

Efficacy and safety of oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol for induction of labor in high-risk obese pregnant women with hypertension or diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of misoprostol administered orally and vaginally in obese pregnant women at term with either gestational hypertension or diabetes.

METHODS

A total of 264 pregnant women were enrolled and categorized into two groups based on their primary condition: hypertension (134 cases) or diabetes mellitus (130 cases) and were further divided into subgroups for misoprostol administration: orally (Oral group) or vaginally (Vaginal group). The primary outcomes measured were changes in the Bishop score following treatment, induction of labor (IOL) success rates, requirement for oxytocin augmentation, duration of labor, mode of delivery, and cesarean section rates.

RESULTS

Significant enhancements in Bishop scores, decreased cesarean section rates and increased success rates of IOL were noted in both administration groups. The incidence of vaginal delivery within 24 h was significantly higher in the Vaginal group compared to the Oral group. Adverse effects, including nausea, uterine overcontraction, hyperfrequency of uterine contraction and uterine hyperstimulation without fetal heart rate deceleration, were significantly more prevalent in the Vaginal group than in the Oral group.

CONCLUSION

Misoprostol administration, both orally and vaginally, proves effective for labor induction in obese pregnant women with hypertension or diabetes. However, the oral route presents a lower risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, suggesting its preference for safer labor induction in this demographic.

Is Misoprostol Vaginal Insert Safe for the Induction of Labor in High-Risk Pregnancy Obese Women?

Induction of labor (IOL) is an event that occurs in up to 25% of pregnancies. In Europe, the misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI—Misodel^®) was approved for labor induction in 2013. Studies on the outcomes and safety of IOL in obese pregnant women are scarce; no data are available on MVI IOL in high-risk pregnancy obese women (HRPO—late-term, hypertension, diabetes). As the obesity rates are growing steadily in pregnant women, we aimed to evaluate the failure rate for induction and the safety of a 200 μg MVI in obese (body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m²) HRPO compared to that for obese non-high-risk pregnancies (non-HRPO). For this purpose, we conducted a cross-sectional study in “Filantropia” Clinical Hospital, Bucharest, Romania, from June 2017—the date of the initiation of the MVI IOL protocol in our clinic—to September 2019. The primary outcomes were the failure rate, measured by cesarean section (CS) ratio, and secondarily, the safety profile of MVI, analyzed by one-way ANOVA. Out of a total of 11,096 registered live births, IOL was performed on 206 obese patients. Of these, 74 obese pregnant women had their labor induced with MVI (HRPO, n = 57, and non-HRPO, n = 17). The average maternal age was 29.9 ± 4.8 years (19–44 years). Across the groups, the rate of CS was 29.8% (n = 17) in the HRPO group compared to 23.5% (n = 4) in the non-HRPO group (p = non significant). In the vaginally birth subgroups, the median time from drug administration to delivery was shorter in the HRPO group compared to the non-HRPO group (16.9 ± 6.0 h 95% confidence interval (CI) 15.0–18.8 vs. 19.4 ± 9.2 h 95% CI 13.8–25.0, p = 0.03). No significant differences were found regarding the maternal outcomes among the studied groups; in terms of perinatal outcomes of safety, 5.4% (n = 4) of the cases of vaginal delivery for HRPO were associated with neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions. The MVI seems to be an efficient labor induction agent in high-risk pregnancy obese women with good maternal outcomes and low perinatologic complications.

Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Brief Review of Conventional Therapy and Herbal Treatment Options

Peptic ulcer is a chronic disease affecting up to 10% of the world's population. The formation of peptic ulcers depends on the presence of gastric juice pH and the decrease in mucosal defenses. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection are the two major factors disrupting the mucosal resistance to injury. Conventional treatments of peptic ulcers, such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 (H2) receptor antagonists, have demonstrated adverse effects, relapses, and various drug interactions. On the other hand, medicinal plants and their chemical compounds are useful in the prevention and treatment of numerous diseases. Hence, this review presents common medicinal plants that may be used for the treatment or prevention of peptic ulcers.

[Fetal death beyond 14 weeks of gestation: induction of labor and obtaining of uterine vacuity]

The objective of this review was to assess benefits and harms of different management options for induction of labor and obtaining of uterine vacuity in case of fetal death beyond of 14 weeks of gestation. In second-trimester, the data are numerous but low methodological quality. In terms of efficiency (induction-expulsion time and uterine evacuation within 24 hours rate) and tolerance in the absence of antecedent of caesarean section, the best protocol for induction of labor in the second-trimester of pregnancy appears to be mifepristone 200mg orally followed 24-48 hours later by vaginal administration of misoprostol 200 to 400 μg every 4 to 6 hours. In third-trimester, there is very little data. The circumstances are similar to induction of labor with living fetus. A term or near term, oxytocin and dinoprostone have a marketing authorization in this indication but misoprostol may be an alternative as the Bishop score and dose of induction of labor with living fetus. In case of previous caesarean section, the risk of uterine rupture is increased in case of a medical induction of labor with prostaglandins. The lowest effective doses should be used (100 to 200 μg every 4 to 6 hours). Prior cervical preparation by the administration of mifepristone and possibly the use of laminar seems essential in this situation.