Journal of Postgraduate Medicine, Education and Research

Register      Login

VOLUME 46 , ISSUE 3 ( July-September, 2012 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Sublingual vs Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction

Sujata Siwatch, Vanita Jain

Citation Information : Siwatch S, Jain V. Sublingual vs Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction. J Postgrad Med Edu Res 2012; 46 (3):138-143.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10028-1031

Published Online: 00-09-2012

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2012; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Background

This study is a randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of sublingual vs vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor.

Materials and methods

A total of 160 women admitted for induction of labor at the PGIMER, Chandigarh, India were randomized to receive 25 μg of vaginal or sublingual misoprostol for labor induction. The two groups were compared for mode of delivery, induction delivery interval, misoprostol dose required, uterine contraction abnormalities and neonatal outcomes.

Results

Majority of women in both groups delivered vaginally (91 and 89% in vaginal and sublingual misoprostol groups respectively). Mean number of doses of misoprostol required for induction of labor was similar in vaginal misoprostol group and sublingual misoprostol group (1.81 ± 0.84 vs 2.05 ± 0.98). The occurrence of uterine contraction abnormalities and neonatal outcome was similar in both groups.

Conclusion

The low dose of 25 μg is equally efficacious and safe by both vaginal and sublingual routes.

How to cite this article

Siwatch S, Kalra J, Bagga R, Jain V. Sublingual vs Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction. J Postgrad Med Edu Res 2012;46(3):138-143.


PDF Share
  1. Sublingual misoprostol for the induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186:72-76.
  2. Sublingual compared with oral misoprostol in term labour induction: Randomized controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynecol 2002;109:645-50.
  3. Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for labor induction of term pregnancies. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 2005;27:24-31.
  4. Misoprostol 50 microgram sublingually versus vaginally for labor induction at term. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005;59:155-61.
  5. Sublingual vs vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2006;94:91-95.
  6. Sublingual compared with vaginal misoprostol for labor induction at term: A randomized control trial. BJOG 2006;113(12):1431-37.
  7. Oral, vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;91(1):2-9.
  8. A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term. BJOG 2007;114:1215-21.
  9. Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term: A randomized prospective placebo-controlled study. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2009;35(6):1054-60.
  10. Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral and vaginal administration. Obstet Gynecol 1997;90:88-92.
  11. The pharmacokinetics of the prostaglandin E1 analogue misoprostol in plasma and colostrums after postpartum oral administration. Eur J Obstet Gycecol Reprod Biol 2003;108:25-28.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.