Comparison of the Maternal and Foetal Outcome in Induction of Labour by Sublingual and Vaginal Misoprostol
Abstract
Purpose of the Study: To compare the efficacy and safety of sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour in term pregnancy.
Materials and Methods: A total of 100 women admitted for induction of labour at PGIMS Rohtak were randomized to receive 25 μg of sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour.
Results: Majority of women in both groups delivered vaginally (90% in both the groups). The mean number of doses of misoprostol required for induction of labour was similar in sublingual and vaginal misoprostol groups (1.64±0.802versus 1.96 ±1.12). The time taken from induction to active phase of labour was 5.72±3.59 versus 7.04 ±4.55 (hours) in the both the groups respectively. The induction delivery interval was 8.38 (hours) in the sublingual and 7.04 (hours) in the vaginal misoprostol groups. Most of the patients in both the groups did not require oxytocin for augmentation of labour.
Conclusion: The low dose of misoprostol i.e. 25 μg is equally efficacious and safe by both sublingual and vaginal routes.
References
2. Filho M, Olimpio Barbosa de, Albuquerque, Rivaldo Mendes de, Pacheco , Alvaro Jose Correia, et al .Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for labor induction of term pregnancies. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2005; 27: 24-31.
3. Caliskan E, Bodur H, Ozeren S, Corakci A, Qzkan S, Yucesoy I. Misoprostol 50 microgram sublingually versus vaginally for labor induction at term. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005; 59 :155-61.
4. Bartusevicius A, Barcaite E , Kriksolaitis R, Gintautas V,Nadisauskiene R. Sublingual compared with vaginal misoprostol for labor induction at term: A randomised control trial . BJOG. 2006; 113(12):1431-37.
5. Ayati S, Vahidroodsari F, Farshidi F , Shahabian M, Aghaee MA. Vaginal versus sublingual misoprostol for labor induction at term and post term: a randomised prospective study.
Iranian J Pharmaceut Res. 2014;13:299-304
6. Feitosa FE, Sampio ZS, Alencar CA Jr, Amorim MM, Passini R Jr. Sublingual vs vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006; 94:91-5.
7. Nassar AH, Awwad J, Khalil AM, Abu- Musa A, Mehio G, Usta IM : A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term. BJOG. 2007;114:1215- 21.
8. Siwach S, Kalra J, Bagga R, Jain V. Sublingual vs vaginal misoprostol for labor induction. J Postgrad Med Edu Res. 2012 ;46(3):138-43.
