Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2025

Author Spotlight: Advancing Pelvic Prolapse Treatment with a Non-Mesh Approach using Laparoscopic Pectopexy
Published on: October 25, 2024
A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Induction of Labour with the Propess Vaginal System to the Prostin Vaginal
Veronika Anzeljc1, Faris Mujezinović1,2
1Department of Perinatology, University Medical Centre Maribor, Ljubljanska 5, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia.
Abstract:
Aim: To compare the perinatal outcome and delivery intervals after the induction of labour with the Prostin vaginal tablet versus the Propess vaginal system in pregnant women with term-PROM. Design: One centre paralleled randomised controlled trial with a computer-generated table to allocate treatments. Setting: University Medical Centre in Slovenia. Participants: A total of 205 singleton healthy pregnant women with term-PROM. Intervention: Induction of labour with the Propess vaginal system (intervention group) versus Prostin tablets (control group). Main outcomes: The rate of failed inductions, complications in labour, time intervals between the PROM, induction, the beginning of the active phase, and delivery. Results: A total of 104 patients received Prostin, and 101 patients received Propess. Induction failure rates in the Prostin and the Propess groups were 8/104 (7.7%) and 5/101 (5.0%), respectively (p = 0.80). Delivery abnormalities were uncommon and comparable across the groups. The rates of caesarean sections in the Prostin and Propess groups were 4/96 (4.2%) and 6/96 (6.3%), respectively. The delivery intervals were comparable across the groups. Conclusions: In term-PROM pregnancies, the Propess vaginal system is a safe and effective option for inducing labour.

