OBJECTIVE: To compare 24-hour controlled-release vaginal dinoprostone pessary vs. gel for induction of labor at term in women with an unfavorable cervix. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: University hospital. POPULATION: A total of 133 women with singleton pregnancies, fetal cephalic presentation, Bishop score < or = 4, gestational age of 37-42 weeks, no previous cesarean section and intact membranes admitted for induction of labor. METHODS: Random allocation to either 24-hour 10-mg controlled-release vaginal dinoprostone pessary or repeat doses of 2 mg vaginal dinoprostone gel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of spontaneous vaginal, operative vaginal and cesarean delivery. RESULTS: The rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery was significantly higher in the pessary group (72%) than in the gel group (54%), paralleled by a lower rate of operative vaginal deliveries (3 vs. 15%). The difference in cesarean section rate (25 vs. 31%) did not reach statistical significance. Both methods of induction of labor appeared to be safe, with no cases of 5-minute Apgar scores < 7 or episodes of uterine hyperstimulation in either group. The medication cost was lower in the pessary group, with a median saving of 50.20 euro compared to the gel group. CONCLUSIONS: Both the 24-hour dinoprostone vaginal pessary and the vaginal gel appear to be safe for labor induction. In women induced at term with a Bishop score < or = 4 the pessary achieved a significantly higher rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery.

A randomized controlled trial of 24-hour vaginal dinoprostone pessary compared to gel for induction of labor in term pregnancies with a Bishop score < or = 4 / Triglia, Mt; Palamara, F; Lojacono, A; Prefumo, F; Frusca, Tiziana. - In: ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA. - ISSN 0001-6349. - Mar 4:5(2010), pp. 651-657. [10.3109/00016340903575998]

A randomized controlled trial of 24-hour vaginal dinoprostone pessary compared to gel for induction of labor in term pregnancies with a Bishop score < or = 4.

FRUSCA, Tiziana
2010-01-01

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare 24-hour controlled-release vaginal dinoprostone pessary vs. gel for induction of labor at term in women with an unfavorable cervix. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: University hospital. POPULATION: A total of 133 women with singleton pregnancies, fetal cephalic presentation, Bishop score < or = 4, gestational age of 37-42 weeks, no previous cesarean section and intact membranes admitted for induction of labor. METHODS: Random allocation to either 24-hour 10-mg controlled-release vaginal dinoprostone pessary or repeat doses of 2 mg vaginal dinoprostone gel. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of spontaneous vaginal, operative vaginal and cesarean delivery. RESULTS: The rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery was significantly higher in the pessary group (72%) than in the gel group (54%), paralleled by a lower rate of operative vaginal deliveries (3 vs. 15%). The difference in cesarean section rate (25 vs. 31%) did not reach statistical significance. Both methods of induction of labor appeared to be safe, with no cases of 5-minute Apgar scores < 7 or episodes of uterine hyperstimulation in either group. The medication cost was lower in the pessary group, with a median saving of 50.20 euro compared to the gel group. CONCLUSIONS: Both the 24-hour dinoprostone vaginal pessary and the vaginal gel appear to be safe for labor induction. In women induced at term with a Bishop score < or = 4 the pessary achieved a significantly higher rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery.
2010
A randomized controlled trial of 24-hour vaginal dinoprostone pessary compared to gel for induction of labor in term pregnancies with a Bishop score < or = 4 / Triglia, Mt; Palamara, F; Lojacono, A; Prefumo, F; Frusca, Tiziana. - In: ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA. - ISSN 0001-6349. - Mar 4:5(2010), pp. 651-657. [10.3109/00016340903575998]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11381/2681512
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 2
  • Scopus 25
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 23
social impact