DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20184981

A retrospective comparative study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mifepristone with misoprostol over misoprostol alone in induction in labor

Reena Sharma, B. R. Sharma, Poojan Dogra

Abstract


Background: The aim is to compare the improvement in pre-induction Bishop’s score, proportion of patients going in labor and induction–delivery interval after using the Misoprostol versus Mifepristone and Misoprostol as cervical ripening and labor inducing agent.

Methods: It is retrospective comparative study conducted on 110 women. Women were randomized in group A and in group B of 55 patients in each group. Group A received tab Mifepristone 200 mg orally on day 1 followed by Misoprostol 25 ug after 48 hours and continued 6 hourly till maximum four tablets and group B patients received tablet Misoprostol 25ug and continued 25ug 6hrly maximum 4 doses. Women observed for improvement in Bishop‟s score, induction-delivery interval and requirement of subsequent doses of Misoprostol.

Results: Present study concluded that tablet Mifepristone is an efficient cervical ripening and inducing agent of labor as pre-induction Bishop’s score was improved. 36.4%patients went into labor only with tablet Mifepristone. The mean induction-delivery interval was,19±12.2hrs in Group 1 as compare to 13.1±13.0 hrs in Group 2. Mean Bishop’s score observed in Group 1 were 2.5±1.78 and 1.67±1.25 in Group 2. It was observed that there was significant improvement in the Bishop’s score after giving Mifepristone to the patients; mean Bishop’s 24hrs after mifepristone were 4.03±1.80. Repeated dose of Misoprostol required in Group 1 was observed to be higher than group 2 as shown in table 8. Mean misoprostol doses required in group 1 was 2.56±1.15 as compared to 1.71±1.58 in group 2.

Conclusions: Mifepristone with Misoprostol reduce the induction delivery interval and more potent in combination for induction of labour as compared to Misoprostol alone.


Keywords


Bishop’s score, Induction-delivery interval, Mifepristone, Misoprostol

Full Text:

PDF

References


Osis MJD, Padua KS, Duarte GA, Souza TR, Faúndes A. The opinion of Brazilian women regarding vaginal labor and cesarean section. Int J Obstet Gynecol 2001;75:S59-66.

Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hellman J, Hewson S, Milner R, Willan A. the Canadian Multicenter Post-term Pregnancy Trial Group: Induction of labour as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 1992;326(24):1587-92.

Crowley P. Interventions for preventing or improving the outcome of delivery at or beyond term (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2000. Oxford: Update Software.

Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24(2):266-8.

Mastrogiannis DS, Knuppel RA. Labor induced using methods that do not involve oxytocin. Clinical obstetrics and gynecology. 1995 Jun 1;38(2):259-66.

Frydman R, Baton C, Lelaidier C, Vial M, Bourget P, Fernandez H. Mife prostone for induction of labour. Lancet.1991;337(8739):488-9.

Bygdeman M, Swahn ML. Progesterone receptor blockage, Effect on uterine contractility and early pregnancy. Contraception. 1985;32(1):45-51.

Li L, Gao W, Chen S. Labour induction in women at term with Mifepristone and Misoprostol. Zhoghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi. 1996;31(11):681-4.

Elliot CL, Brennand JE, Calder AA. The effects of Mifepristone on cervical ripening and labor induction in primigravidae. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92(5):804-9.

Wing DA, Fassett Michael J, Mishell Daniel R, Mifepristone for Preinduction Cervical Ripening Beyond 41 Weeks' Gestation: A Randomized Controlled Trial, Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(4):543-8.

Su H, Li E, Weng L. Mifepristone for labour induction. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi.1996;31 (11):676-80.

J McGill, Shetty A. Mifepristone and Misoprostol in the induction of labour at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;96(2):80-4.