• Users Online: 1294
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 34-37

Randomized comparative clinical study of the efficacy and safety of intracervical prostaglandin E2 with intravaginal prostaglandin E1 in induction of labour and its obstetric outcome

1 Department of OBG, Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sheikhpura, Patna-14, Bihar, India
2 Department of PSM, Indira Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, Sheikhpura, Patna-14, Bihar, India

Correspondence Address:
Sadia Parween
Senior Resident, Department of OBG, IGIMS, Sheikhpura, Patna-14, Bihar
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Background : This comparative study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of 50 μg of intravaginal misoprostol with 0.5 mg of intracervical dinoprostone gel in terms of the induction-initiation interval, induction- delivery interval , mode of delivery and associated maternal and fetal complications. Methods: 50 patients who were admitted for induction of labour were included in this study. They were randomly selected to receive either intravaginal misoprostol or intracervical cerviprime gel. 25 women received intravaginal 50 μg Misoprostol (Group A) every 4 hours for maximum of 6 doses and 25 women received 0.5 mg of intracervical cerviprime gel (Group B) till maximum of 3 doses. Comparison was done in terms of time taken for induction to delivery, mean time taken for onset of labour, mode of delivery , maternal complications, APGAR score at 1 and 5 minutes and the neonatal outcome in either of the groups. Result: The mean time taken for onset of labour was less in the misoprostol group than in the cerviprime group (6.7 hours v/s 7.5 hours, P = 0.47). Similarly duration from induction to delivery was less (23.5 hours v/s 25.8 hours, P >0.33) for misoprostol than cerviprime gel. Cesarean section rate was slightly less in misoprostol group (40% v/s 44%). Maternal complications were minimal in either group & the neonatal outcome was good in both the groups. The induction cost was much less in the misoprostol group. Conclusion: Compared to cerviprime gel; misoprostol is safe, efficacious, cheap, well tolerated drug by mother and fetus. It was found to be a better inducing agent, has short induction to delivery interval thus short duration of labour.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded34    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal