Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome

Abstract Induction of labour (IOL) is increasingly used in obstetric practice. For patients with unfavourable cervix, we are constantly looking for an optimal, in terms of effectiveness and safety, ripening of cervix protocol. It was retrospective cohort study. We analyzed obstetrical results in 481...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jakub Mlodawski, Marta Mlodawska, Justyna Armanska, Grzegorz Swiercz, Stanisław Gluszek
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/e16539abedff4a83ac1d096bafa3c3d1
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:e16539abedff4a83ac1d096bafa3c3d1
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:e16539abedff4a83ac1d096bafa3c3d12021-12-02T17:39:31ZMisoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome10.1038/s41598-021-88723-52045-2322https://doaj.org/article/e16539abedff4a83ac1d096bafa3c3d12021-04-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88723-5https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract Induction of labour (IOL) is increasingly used in obstetric practice. For patients with unfavourable cervix, we are constantly looking for an optimal, in terms of effectiveness and safety, ripening of cervix protocol. It was retrospective cohort study. We analyzed obstetrical results in 481 patients undergoing IOL in one center using two different vaginal inserts that release prostaglandins at a constant rate for 24 h—misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI) with 200 µg of misoprostol (n = 367) and dinoprostone vaginal insert (DVI) with 10 mg of dinoprostone (n = 114). Full-term, single pregnancy patients with intact fetal membranes and the cervix evaluated in Bishop score ≤ 6 were included in the analysis. In the group of MVI patients, the labour ended with caesarean section more often (OR 2.71 95% CI 1.63–4.47) and more frequent unreassuring cardiotocographic trace indicating the surgical delivery occurred (OR 2.38 95% CI 1.10–5.17). We did not notice any differences in the percentage of vacuum extraction and patients in whom the use of oxytocin was necessary during labour induction. The clinical status of newborns after birth and the pH of cord blood did not differ between groups.The use of MVI 200 μg in patients with an unriped cervix is associated with a greater chance of completing delivery by caesarean section and increased chance of abnormal intrapartum CTG trace compared to the use of DVI 10 mg. These differences do not affect the clinical and biochemical status of the newborn.Jakub MlodawskiMarta MlodawskaJustyna ArmanskaGrzegorz SwierczStanisław GluszekNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-6 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Jakub Mlodawski Marta Mlodawska Justyna Armanska Grzegorz Swiercz Stanisław Gluszek Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
description	Abstract Induction of labour (IOL) is increasingly used in obstetric practice. For patients with unfavourable cervix, we are constantly looking for an optimal, in terms of effectiveness and safety, ripening of cervix protocol. It was retrospective cohort study. We analyzed obstetrical results in 481 patients undergoing IOL in one center using two different vaginal inserts that release prostaglandins at a constant rate for 24 h—misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI) with 200 µg of misoprostol (n = 367) and dinoprostone vaginal insert (DVI) with 10 mg of dinoprostone (n = 114). Full-term, single pregnancy patients with intact fetal membranes and the cervix evaluated in Bishop score ≤ 6 were included in the analysis. In the group of MVI patients, the labour ended with caesarean section more often (OR 2.71 95% CI 1.63–4.47) and more frequent unreassuring cardiotocographic trace indicating the surgical delivery occurred (OR 2.38 95% CI 1.10–5.17). We did not notice any differences in the percentage of vacuum extraction and patients in whom the use of oxytocin was necessary during labour induction. The clinical status of newborns after birth and the pH of cord blood did not differ between groups.The use of MVI 200 μg in patients with an unriped cervix is associated with a greater chance of completing delivery by caesarean section and increased chance of abnormal intrapartum CTG trace compared to the use of DVI 10 mg. These differences do not affect the clinical and biochemical status of the newborn.
format	article
author	Jakub Mlodawski Marta Mlodawska Justyna Armanska Grzegorz Swiercz Stanisław Gluszek
author_facet	Jakub Mlodawski Marta Mlodawska Justyna Armanska Grzegorz Swiercz Stanisław Gluszek
author_sort	Jakub Mlodawski
title	Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
title_short	Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
title_full	Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
title_fullStr	Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
title_full_unstemmed	Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
title_sort	misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/e16539abedff4a83ac1d096bafa3c3d1
work_keys_str_mv	AT jakubmlodawski misoprostolvsdinoprostonevaginalinsertinlabourinductioncomparisonofobstetricaloutcome AT martamlodawska misoprostolvsdinoprostonevaginalinsertinlabourinductioncomparisonofobstetricaloutcome AT justynaarmanska misoprostolvsdinoprostonevaginalinsertinlabourinductioncomparisonofobstetricaloutcome AT grzegorzswiercz misoprostolvsdinoprostonevaginalinsertinlabourinductioncomparisonofobstetricaloutcome AT stanisławgluszek misoprostolvsdinoprostonevaginalinsertinlabourinductioncomparisonofobstetricaloutcome
_version_	1718379853029310464

Misoprostol vs dinoprostone vaginal insert in labour induction: comparison of obstetrical outcome

Ejemplares similares