Randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert for labor induction

References

• Jagani N, Schulman A, Fleischer A, et at. Role of the cervix in induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1982;59:21–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson PD. A comparison of four methods of ripening the unfavorable cervix. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1978;85:941–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kazzi GM, Bottoms SF, Rosen MG. Efficacy and safety of Laminaria digitata for preinduction ripening of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1982;60:440–3
   Google Scholar
• Calder A. Cervical ripening. In Bygdeman M, Berger GS, Keith LG, eds. Prostaglandins, and their Inhibitors in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Lancaster, UK: MTP Press, 1986:145–64
   Google Scholar
• Rayburn WF. Clinical experience with a controlled-release prostaglandin E2 intravaginal insert in the USA. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997 ;104\(Supp115):8–12
   Google Scholar
• Laube DW. Induction of labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1997; 40:485–95
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Wears RL, et at. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:633–42
   Google Scholar
• Kramer RL, Gilson OJ, Morrison DS, et at. A randomized trial of misoprostol and oxytocin for induction of labor: safety and efficacy. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:387–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mundle WR, Young DC. Vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 1996;88:521–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg AB, Greenberg MB, Darney PD. Misoprostol and pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2001;344:38–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of Labor. ACOG Technical Bulletin No.217. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1995
   Google Scholar
• Rayburn WF, Wapner RJ, Barss VA, et at. An intravaginal controlled-release prostaglandin E2 pessary for cervical ripening and initiation of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol 1992;79:374–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith CV, Rayburn WF, Miller AM. Intravaginal prosta-glandin E2 for cervical ripening and initiation of labor: com-parison of a multi-dose gel and a single, controlled release pessary. J Reprod Med 1994;39: 381–4
   Google Scholar
• Beebe LA, Rayburn WF, Beaty CM, et at. Indications for labor induction. Differences between university and community hosp itals. J Reprod Med 2000;45:469–75
   Google Scholar
• Buser D, Mora O, Arias F. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices. Obstet Gyneco11997;89:581–5
   Google Scholar
• Blanchette HA, Nayak S, Erasmus S. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) with those of dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2) for cervical ripening and induction of labor in a community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;180: 1551–9
   Google Scholar
• Sanchez-Ramos L, Peterson DE, Delke I, et al. Labor induction with prostaglandin Ei misoprostol compared with dino-prostone vaginal insert: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:401–5
   Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Response to Searle's Drug Warning on Misoprostol. ACOG Committee Opinion No.248. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 2000
   Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of Labor with Misoprostol. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 228. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, 1999
   Google Scholar
• Wing DA, Ortiz-Omphroy O, Paul RH. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with con-tinuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induc-tion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;177:612–18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yip SK, Tse AO, Haines CJ, et at. MisoprostoPs effect on uterine arterial blood flow and fetal heart rate in early pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95:232–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chen WH, Lai HC, Tang YH, et at. Fetal Doppler hemo-dynamic changes in spontaneous versus prostaglandin El-induced active labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1999; 78:599–604
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Delke I. Labor induction with 25 jig versus 50 jig intravaginal misoprostol: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2002;99: 145–51
   Google Scholar
• Lydon-Rochelle M, Holt VL, Easterling TR, et at. Risk of uterine rupture during labor among women with a prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 2001;345:3–8
   Google Scholar
• Plaut MM, Schwartz ML, Lubarsky SL. Uterine rupture associated with the use of misoprostol in the gravid patient with a previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180:1535–42
   Google Scholar
• Wing DA, Lovett K, Paul RH. Disruptionof prior uterine inci-sion following misoprostol for labor induction in women with previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1998;91:828–30
   Google Scholar
• Nwachuku V, Sison A, Quashie C, et at. Safety of miso-prostol as a cervical ripening agent in vaginal birth after cesarean section. Prim Care Update ObstetlGynecol 2001; 8:244–7 section.
   Google Scholar