1Professor, Dept. of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College, Chennai
2Associate Professor, Dept. of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College, Chennai
3PG Student, Dept. of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Sri Ramachandra Medical College, Chennai
*Corresponding Author: Email: drsheilasunil@hotmail.com
Online published on 20 June, 2017.
To compare the efficacy of intracervical dinoprostone and sublingual misoprostol in preinduction cervical ripening.
This prospective observational study was performed on 410 women with medical or obstetrical indications for labour induction. On an alternative basis, women were selected for intracervical dinoprostone and sublingual misoprostol for pre-induction cervical ripening. 0.5 milligram of dinoprostone was placed intracervically every 6–12 hours for a maximum of three doses in one group and 25 microgram of misoprostol was given sublingually, every 4 hours for a maximum of five doses in the other group. Mean number of doses required, induction to active phase interval, induction to delivery interval, need for oxytocin augmentation, mean cost and neonatal outcomes were analyzed. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS 17 version software. Statistical significance was considered as 0.05 level (P value).
There was no significant difference in the mean number of doses required with regard to Bishop's score when misoprostol was used, but significant difference was there when dinoprostone was used. There was no statistically significant difference in induction to active phase interval, induction to delivery interval and neonatal outcomes between the two groups. There was significantly higher failed induction in dinoprostone group. There was significantly lesser oxytocin requirement in misoprostol group. Mean cost was 37.75 times greater in dinoprostone group.
25 microgram of sublingual misoprostol provides a cheaper alternative method to intracervical dinoprostone for induction of labour.
