Suppr超能文献

足月引产时阴道用米索前列醇与地诺前列酮阴道栓剂的疗效及安全性比较:一项随机试验

Comparative efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in labor induction at term: a randomized trial.

作者信息

Ozkan Sebiha, Calişkan Eray, Doğer Emek, Yücesoy Izzet, Ozeren Semih, Vural Birol

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Kocaeli University, Kocaeli, Turkey.

出版信息

Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2009 Jul;280(1):19-24. doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0843-9. Epub 2008 Nov 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol (PGE(1) analog) with dinoprostone (PGE(2) analog) vaginal insert for labor induction in term pregnancies.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 112 women with singleton pregnancies of > or =37 weeks of gestation, and low Bishop scores underwent labor induction. The subjects were randomized to receive either 50 mug misoprostol intravaginally every 4 h to a maximum of five doses or a 10 mg dinoprostone vaginal insert for a maximum of 12 h. Time interval from induction to vaginal delivery, vaginal delivery rates within 12 and 24 h, requirement of oxytocin augmentation, incidence of tachysystole and uterine hyperstimulation, mode of delivery, rate of cesarean section due to fetal distress and neonatal outcome were outcome measures. Student's t test, Chi square test, Fischer's exact test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Time interval from induction to vaginal delivery was found to be significantly shorter in misoprostol group when compared to dinoprostone subjects (680 +/- 329 min vs. 1070 +/- 435 min, P < 0.001). Vaginal delivery rates within 12 h were found to be significantly higher with misoprostol induction [n = 37 (66%) vs. n = 25 (44.6%); P = 0.02], whereas vaginal delivery rates in 24 h did not differ significantly between groups [n = 41 (73.2%) vs. n = 36 (64.2%); P = 0.3]. More subjects required oxytocin augmentation in dinoprostone group [n = 35 (62.5%) vs. n = 20 (35.7%), P = 0.005] and cardiotocography tracings revealed early decelerations occurring more frequently with misoprostol induction (10.7 vs. 0%, P = 0.03). Tachysystole and uterine hyperstimulation, mode of delivery, rate of cesarean sections due to fetal distress and adverse neonatal outcome were not demonstrated to be significantly different between groups (P = 1, P = 0.5, P = 0.4, P = 0.22, P = 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Using vaginal misoprostol is an effective way of labor induction in term pregnant women with unfavorable cervices, since it is associated with a shorter duration of labor induction and higher rates of vaginal delivery within 12 h. Misoprostol and dinoprostone are equally safe, since misoprostol did not result in a rise in maternal and neonatal morbidity, namely, tachysystole, uterine hyperstimulation, cesarean section rates and admission to neonatal intensive care units as reported previously in literature.

摘要

目的

比较阴道用米索前列醇(PGE₁类似物)与地诺前列酮(PGE₂类似物)阴道栓剂用于足月妊娠引产的有效性和安全性。

研究设计

总共112名单胎妊娠、孕周≥37周且Bishop评分低的妇女接受引产。受试者被随机分为两组,一组每4小时阴道内给予50μg米索前列醇,最多5剂;另一组给予10mg地诺前列酮阴道栓剂,最多12小时。观察指标包括引产至阴道分娩的时间间隔、12小时和24小时内的阴道分娩率、催产素加强的需求、宫缩过速和子宫过度刺激的发生率、分娩方式、因胎儿窘迫而行剖宫产的比率以及新生儿结局。采用学生t检验、卡方检验、费舍尔精确检验进行统计分析。

结果

与地诺前列酮组相比,米索前列醇组引产至阴道分娩的时间间隔显著缩短(680±329分钟 vs. 1070±435分钟,P<0.001)。米索前列醇引产组12小时内的阴道分娩率显著更高[n = 37(66%) vs. n = 25(44.6%);P = 0.02],而两组24小时内的阴道分娩率无显著差异[n = 41(73.2%) vs. n = 36(64.2%);P = 0.3]。地诺前列酮组更多受试者需要催产素加强[n = 35(62.5%) vs. n = 20(35.7%),P = 0.005],并且胎心监护显示米索前列醇引产时早期减速更频繁出现(10.7% vs. 0%,P = 0.03)。两组间宫缩过速和子宫过度刺激、分娩方式、因胎儿窘迫而行剖宫产的比率以及不良新生儿结局均无显著差异(P = 1,P = 0.5,P = 0.4,P = 0.22,P = 0.5)。

结论

对于宫颈条件不佳的足月孕妇,使用阴道用米索前列醇是一种有效的引产方法,因为它引产时间较短且12小时内阴道分娩率较高。米索前列醇和地诺前列酮同样安全,因为米索前列醇并未导致孕产妇和新生儿发病率升高,即宫缩过速、子宫过度刺激、剖宫产率以及新生儿重症监护病房收治率,正如之前文献报道的那样。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验