Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2015, Vol. 42 Issue (5): 649-652    DOI: 10.12891/ceog1981.2015
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
The effectiveness of misoprostol or dinoprostone in neonatal outcome after labour induction in post-term nulliparas
M. Soilemetzidis1, P. Pinidis2, N. Tsagias2, A. Ammari2, A. Liberis2, V. Liberis2, G. Galazios2, P. Tsikouras2, *()
1General Hospital Kavala, Kavala
2Democritus University of Thrace, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Alexandroupolis (Greece)
Download:  PDF(162KB)  ( 10 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  
Objective: The object of this study was to investigate the efficacy of vaginal administration of misoprostol versus dinoprostone in neonatal outcome. Materials and Methods: The first Group A included 77 pregnant women, who requested pregnancy termination one week after labour term and received vaginally misoprostol 50 μg, while the other 69 pregnant women in Group B were vaginally administrated three mg dinoprostone. According to the authors’ protocol this procedure was repeated after six hours for a maximum of two times. Results: The labour duration was longer in Group B (p = 0.000), while the APGAR score was better in Group A (p = 0.015). In Group A the labour modus was as follows: 86.9% normal vaginal labour, 3.8% vacuum extraction, and 9.3% cesarean section, while in Group B it was 82.83% normal vaginal labour, 3.07% vacuum extraction, and 14.1% cesarean section. Conclusion: Misoprostol has advantages according to neonatal outcome compared to administration of dinoprostone.
Key words:  Misoprostol      Dinoprostone      Neonatal outcome      Post-term induction     
Published:  10 October 2015     
*Corresponding Author(s):  T. PANAGIOTIS     E-mail:  ptsikour@med.duth.gr

Cite this article: 

M. Soilemetzidis, P. Pinidis, N. Tsagias, A. Ammari, A. Liberis, V. Liberis, G. Galazios, P. Tsikouras. The effectiveness of misoprostol or dinoprostone in neonatal outcome after labour induction in post-term nulliparas. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2015, 42(5): 649-652.

URL: 

https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/10.12891/ceog1981.2015     OR     https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/Y2015/V42/I5/649

[1] Ugo Indraccolo, Maria Giulia Lombana Marino, Beatrice Bianchi, Silvia Catagini, Danila Morano, Pantaleo Greco. Symphysis-fundal height correlates with adverse delivery and neonatal outcomes in induced full-term and premature pregnancies[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 637-641.
[2] Jakub Mlodawski, Marta Mlodawska, Justyna Armanska. Dinoprostone vaginal insert vs the Foley catheter in labor induction. Observational study[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 665-669.
[3] Wassan Nori, Muna Abdulghani, Ali B Roomi, Wisam Akram. To operate or to wait? Doppler indices as predictors for medical termination for first trimester missed abortion[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(1): 168-174.
[4] N.K. Aref. Rectal misoprostol after cesarean delivery: does it affect recovery of bowel functions? A prospective randomized trial[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(6): 906-910.
[5] I.F. Urunsak, U.K. Gulec, E. Eser, M. Sucu, C. Akcabay, S. Buyukkurt. The role of dinoprostone for labor induction in postterm and high-risk term pregnancies[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2020, 47(5): 664-668.
[6] M. Collict, Y. Mucat Baron, M. Gatt, N. Calleja. Advanced maternal age and neonatal outcomes in Malta[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(2): 265-269.
[7] E. Pereira Alves Filho, F.C. Nogueira Arcanjo, A.R. Mesquita Rocha, D. Frade Bernardes, M.H. Oliveira Santos, N.L. Pereira Coutinho. The efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol for the induction of labor in patients with obstetrical or medical indication for labor induction[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2019, 46(1): 81-84.
[8] I. Babović, M. Matić, S. Plešinac. Woman with Marfan syndrome in pregnancy: good maternal and fetal outcome – a case report and literature review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(6): 920-923.
[9] A.A. Rouzi, N. AlSinani, N. AlMansouri, N. Alsahly. Intra-cervical misoprostol for the treatment of second-trimester fetal demise[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2018, 45(3): 344-346.
[10] K.P. Fuller, S. DeGroff, A.F. Borgida. Neonatal outcomes based on antenatal corticosteroid exposure time for infants delivered between 23 and 34 weeks gestation[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017, 44(2): 247-251.
[11] Y. Cakiroglu, E. Doger, S. Yildirim Kopuk, A. Gunlemez, D. Oguz, E. Caliskan. Does amnioreduction increase success of emergency cervical cerclage in cases with advanced cervical dilatation and protruding membranes?[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2016, 43(5): 708-712.
[12] N. Aka, Ş. Arpacı, F. Vura, G. Köse. Perinatal and neonatal outcomes of maternal heart diseases[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2016, 43(4): 560-564.
[13] M.Y. Oncel, S. Celen, G. Demirel, F.E. Canpolat, E. Calisici, R. Ozdemir, S.S. Oguz, S. Saygan, N. Danisman, U. Dilmen. Effect of maternal cervical bacterial colonization on neonatal outcome in high-risk pregnancies: results from a tertiary maternity center in Turkey[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2015, 42(4): 485-489.
[14] C. Liang, D. Xu, J. He. Cervical ripening agent dinoprostone for delivery inductionin late pregnancy mothers: experiences of 685 cases[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2015, 42(1): 69-71.
[15] A. Kale, H. Terzi, E. Kale. Sublingual misoprostol is better for cervical ripening prior to hysteroscopy in post-menopausal women[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2014, 41(4): 402-404.
No Suggested Reading articles found!