Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 15, 2025
External Cephalic Version: Is it an Effective and Safe Procedure?
Published on: June 6, 2020
Comparison of Misoprostol for Labor Induction: Vaginal Insert Versus Oral Application Concerning Efficiency and
Dominik Ratiu1, Mirka Hunke2, Jessika Ratiu2
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Cologne and Medical Faculty, Cologne, Germany dominik.ratiu@uk-koeln.de.
Background/Aim:
The aim of the present retrospective study was to examine the efficiency and safety of the induction of labor with Misoprostol, administered either vaginally or orally.
Patients And Methods:
This retrospective cohort study included pregnant women with a gestational age of ≥36 +0 weeks and a singleton pregnancy who underwent induction of labor with Misoprostol as vaginal insert or as tablet (oral) between January 2014 and January 2019 at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the University Hospital of Cologne. The objective of this study was to analyze the time until delivery and the maternal and neonatal outcomes.
Results:
A total of 1,511 patients were included in this retrospective analysis, of whom 1,035 patients (68.5%) underwent induction of labor with a misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI) and 476 (31.5%) with tablets (oral misoprostol: OM). MVI significantly shortened the time from application to delivery (p<0.001) in comparison to OM, reduced the need for epidural anesthesia (EA) (p=0.018) without an increase in caesarean sections (CS) (p=1), ventouse deliveries (VD) (p=0.715), maternal birth injuries or a reduced neonatal outcome (APGAR-Score, umbilical cord pH).
Conclusion:
MVI is superior to OM in terms of efficiency (primary outcome: time from application to delivery) and is equally safe (primary outcome: CS rate). Our study, along with existing literature, highlights the need for further research, particularly regarding neonatal outcomes. Additionally, it underscores the importance of careful consideration when inducing labor and ensuring informed consent.
Related Concept Videos
01:20Drugs for Peptic Ulcer Disease: Prostaglandin Analogs as Mucosal Protective Agents
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can induce peptic ulcers by inhibiting cyclooxygenase, decreasing...
01:29Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Epidural Anesthesia
Since epidural anesthetics can be infused through an epidural catheter, all types of drugs, including short-acting ones, can be administered. Chloroprocaine and lidocaine are examples of short and long-duration anesthetics, respectively. Bupivacaine...
01:18Drug Delivery: Enteral Route
01:16Drug Delivery: Overview
Enteral delivery involves administering drugs directly through swallowing, sublingual placement, or buccal application. Orally administered drugs predominantly navigate the...
01:18Additional Routes of Drug Administration
Administering drugs via inhalation allows for the direct delivery of gaseous, volatile substances or droplets to different parts of the respiratory tract. One of the advantages of the inhalation route is the rapid absorption of drugs into the circulatory system, which is possible because of the large surface area of...
01:18Routes of Drug Administration: Enteral
Enteral administration involves drug administration via the mouth in two ways: orally or sublingually.
Unlike sublingually drugs, drugs that are taken orally pass through the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and get metabolized by the liver. Once metabolized, the drug is absorbed into the systemic circulation, reaching different body parts via the bloodstream. However, while passing through the stomach,...