Oral or Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction and Cesarean Delivery Risk.

Authors:
Dr Ahizechukwu C Eke, MD, MPH, FWACS
Dr Ahizechukwu C Eke, MD, MPH, FWACS
Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine & Clinical Pharmacology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N Wolfe Street
Maternal Fetal Medicine
Baltimore, Maryland | United States

Obstet Gynecol 2019 07;134(1):10-16

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York; the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico; the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland; the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.

Objective: To evaluate whether cervical ripening with oral misoprostol increases cesarean delivery risk and prolongs time to vaginal delivery compared with vaginal misoprostol in a predominantly overweight population.

Methods: This single center, retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary care academic medical center and compared labor induction outcomes with vaginal misoprostol to outcomes with oral misoprostol after a complete institutional shift to oral misoprostol. Labor induction using 25 micrograms vaginal misoprostol in 2013-2014 was compared with 50 micrograms oral misoprostol in 2014-2015. The primary outcome was cesarean delivery. Secondary outcomes included time to vaginal delivery, uterine tachysystole, maternal hemorrhage, and composite adverse neonatal outcomes. Demographics and outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical tests. Multivariable regression models accounting for potential confounders were created for the primary and secondary outcomes with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) as the measures of effect.

Results: There were 138 women in the oral and 138 women in the vaginal misoprostol groups. In the overall cohort, the median (interquartile range) body mass index was 31.7 (28.2-36.8) and most women (72%) were of either black or Hispanic race or ethnicity. The frequency of cesarean delivery was higher in the oral than the vaginal misoprostol group (32% vs 21%; P=.04). The adjusted odds of cesarean was higher with oral misoprostol (aOR 2.01; 95% CI 1.07-3.76). Among nulliparous women, the frequency of cesarean delivery was 41% in the oral and 28% in the vaginal misoprostol groups (aOR 2.79; 95% CI 1.26-6.19). Women had a longer time to vaginal delivery in the oral compared with vaginal misoprostol group (41 vs 31 hours respectively, P=.01). Tachysystole occurred more frequently with vaginal misoprostol (20% vs 11%; P=.04).

Conclusion: Compared with vaginal misoprostol, oral misoprostol may be associated with increased risk of cesarean delivery and longer time to vaginal delivery.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000003274DOI Listing
July 2019
22 Reads
5.175 Impact Factor

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

vaginal misoprostol
40
cesarean delivery
24
oral misoprostol
24
time vaginal
16
misoprostol
16
vaginal delivery
16
vaginal
13
compared vaginal
12
labor induction
12
oral
11
delivery
10
longer time
8
misoprostol labor
8
oral vaginal
8
adjusted odds
8
138 women
8
higher oral
8
frequency cesarean
8
delivery risk
8
misoprostol group
8

Altmetric Statistics

Similar Publications