Misoprostol for induction of labor at term?

June 1, 2006

While oral misoprostol isn't superior to vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor at term, it isn't inferior either. It doesn't lead to poorer health outcomes for women or their infants and offers a preferred route of administration.

While oral misoprostol isn't superior to vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor at term, it isn't inferior either. It doesn't lead to poorer health outcomes for women or their infants and offers a preferred route of administration.

Researchers from Australia conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 741 women. They found no significant differences in the rates of vaginal birth not achieved in 24 hours (46% vs. 41.2%), cesarean section (22.7% vs. 26.6%), cesarean section for fetal distress (8.8% vs. 9.3%), or in uterine hyperstimulation with changes in fetal heart rate (0.8% vs. 1.6%). In addition, the women randomized to receive misoprostol reported a more positive birth experience.

Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Robinson JS. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour at term: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332:509-513.