Colón Iris, Clawson Kaytha, Hunter Kennith, Druzin Maurice L, Taslimi M Mark
Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305-5317, USA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Mar;192(3):747-52. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.051.
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening before induction of labor.
Two hundred and four women between 32 to 42 weeks of gestation with an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < or = 6) and an indication for labor induction were randomized to receive oral or vaginal misoprostol every 4 hours up to 4 doses. The oral misoprostol group received 50 microg initially followed by 100 microg in each subsequent dose. The vaginal group received 25 microg in each dose. The primary outcome was the interval from first misoprostol dose to delivery. Patient satisfaction and side effects were assessed by surveys completed after delivery.
Ninety-three (45.6%) women received oral misoprostol; 111 (54.4%) received vaginal misoprostol. There was no difference in the average interval from the first dose of misoprostol to delivery in the oral (21.1 + 7.9 hrs) and vaginal (21.5 + 11.0 hrs, P = NS) misoprostol groups. The incidence of hyperstimulation in the oral group was 2.2% vs 5.4% in the vaginal group, P = NS. Eighteen patients in the oral group (19.4%) and 36 (32.4%) in the vaginal group underwent cesarean section (P < .05). This difference was attributed to better tolerance of more doses of misoprostol by the women in the oral group. There was no difference in side effects (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, shivering) between groups. Fourteen percent of women in the vaginal group versus 7.5% in the oral group were dissatisfied with the use of misoprostol (P = NS).
Stepwise oral misoprostol (50 microg followed by 100 microg) appears to be as effective as vaginal misoprostol (25 microg) for cervical ripening with a low incidence of hyperstimulation, no increase in side effects, a high rate of patient satisfaction, and is associated with a lower cesarean section rate.
本研究旨在比较逐步口服米索前列醇与阴道用米索前列醇在引产术前促宫颈成熟方面的疗效和安全性。
204例妊娠32至42周、宫颈条件不佳( Bishop评分≤6分)且有引产指征的妇女被随机分组,每4小时接受口服或阴道用米索前列醇,最多4剂。口服米索前列醇组初始剂量为50微克,随后每剂为100微克。阴道用米索前列醇组每剂为25微克。主要结局是从首次使用米索前列醇剂量到分娩的间隔时间。通过产后完成的调查问卷评估患者满意度和副作用。
93例(45.6%)妇女接受口服米索前列醇;111例(54.4%)接受阴道用米索前列醇。口服米索前列醇组(21.1 + 7.9小时)和阴道用米索前列醇组(21.5 + 11.0小时,P = 无显著差异)从首次使用米索前列醇剂量到分娩的平均间隔时间无差异。口服组的子宫过度刺激发生率为2.2%,而阴道组为5.4%,P = 无显著差异。口服组18例患者(19.4%)和阴道组36例患者(32.4%)接受了剖宫产(P < 0.05)。这种差异归因于口服组妇女对更多剂量米索前列醇的耐受性更好。两组间副作用(恶心、呕吐、腹泻、寒战)无差异。阴道组14%的妇女与口服组7.5%的妇女对米索前列醇的使用不满意(P = 无显著差异)。
逐步口服米索前列醇(50微克随后100微克)在促宫颈成熟方面似乎与阴道用米索前列醇(25微克)一样有效,子宫过度刺激发生率低,副作用无增加,患者满意度高,且剖宫产率较低。