Intravaginal misoprostol vs. expectant management in premature rupture of membranes with low Bishop scores at term
- 17 May 2002
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Wiley in International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
- Vol. 77 (2) , 109-115
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-7292(02)00030-9
Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction in premature rupture of membranes (PROM) cases with low Bishop scores at term. Sixty-two PROM cases who fulfilled the criteria of 36 weeks of completed gestation, not in active labor, singleton pregnancy with vertex presentation, normal fetal heart rate reactivity, amniotic fluid index >5 cm and Bishop score <5, consented to participate in the study. Thirty-one of the cases were included in study group and a 50-microg misoprostol tablet was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix. Another 31 cases were included in control group and managed expectantly. Treatment success was defined as an interval from membrane rupture to delivery of <24 h. The mean admittance-delivery interval was significantly shorter in the study group (8.68+/-4.40 h) compared with the control group (26.22+/-18.98 h, P=0.001) and the mean interval from membrane rupture to delivery were also significantly shorter in the study group (19.37+/-7.20 h) than the control group (33.05+/-20.85 h, P=0.001). Oxytocin necessity was significantly lower in the study group than the control group (45.2% vs. 100%, P=0.00051). Tachysystole occurred more frequently in the study group (8 cases, 25.8% vs. 2 cases, 6.5%, P=0.038). There were no difference between two groups with regard to birth weights, 1- and 5-min Apgar scores and the need for neonatal intensive care unit. It is effective, safe and economic to use misoprostol vaginally in PROM cases with low Bishop scores at term.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Labor induction with misoprostolAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1999
- Misoprostol is more efficacious for labor induction than prostaglandin E2 , but is it associated with more risk?American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1999
- Comparison of the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol (prostaglandin E1 ) with those of dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2 ) for cervical ripening and induction of labor in a community hospitalAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1999
- Induction of labor with misoprostol for premature rupture of membranes beyond thirty-six weeks’ gestationAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1998
- Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administrationObstetrics & Gynecology, 1997
- A randomized trial of misoprostol and oxytocin for induction of labor: Safety and efficacyObstetrics & Gynecology, 1997
- Cervical Priming With Oral Misoprostol in Pre-Labor Rupture of Membranes at TermObstetrics & Gynecology, 1996
- A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor inductionAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1995
- Comparison of 12- and 72-Hour Expectant Management of Premature Rupture of Membranes in Term PregnanciesPublished by Wolters Kluwer Health ,1995
- Management of premature rupture of membranes at term: Randomized trialAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1994