Efficacy and safety of labor induction methods using prostaglandin E1

Abstract

Worldwide incidence of induced births continues to rise. In developed countries, labor induction frequency approaching 30% of total delivery. The procedure of induction of labor can not be considered completely secure, which leads to the need to find an effective and safe method of labor induction. The aim of the study was to determine the effectiveness of various schemes of labor induction with prostaglandin E1 and their effect on perinatal outcomes. We studied vaginal and oral misoprostol, as well as induction of labor scheme “chinin-oxytocin”. Evaluated the main parameters of the act of birth and the condition of the fetus and newborn. The high efficiency of misoprostol for induction of labor used, as in the oral and vaginal administration. It was revealed that vaginal administration of misoprostol every third pregnant woman meets irregular, discoordinated contructions, whereas the oral administration of misoprostol this anomaly uterine activity is less common. Most of the children in all groups were born with Apgar scores of 7 points or higher. The data indicate that the efficacy and safety of misoprostol used for labor induction.

Keywords

induction of labor / prostaglandin E1 / misoprostol / oxytocin

References

[1] 1.Чернуха Е.А. Родовой блок. – М.: Триада-Х, 2003. [Chernuha EA. Rodovoj blok. Moscow: Triada-H; 2003. (In Russ.)]

[2] 2.Bartusevicius A, Barcaite E, Nadisauskiene R. Oral, vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005;91(1):2-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.07.002.

[3] 3.Основные показатели деятельности акушерско-гинекологической службы в 2012 году: справочные материалы / ред. Е. Н. Байбарина. – М., 2013. – 42 с. [Bajbarina EN (red.) Osnovnye pokazateli dejatel’nosti akushersko-ginekologicheskoj sluzhby v 2012 godu: spravochnye materialy. Moscow; 2013. 42 p. (In Russ.)]

[4] 4.Calder AA, Loughney AD, Weir CJ, Barber JW. Induction of labour in nulliparous and multiparous women: a UK, multicentre, open-label study of intravaginal misoprostol in comparison with dinoprostone. BJOG. 2008 Sep;115(10):1279-88. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01829.x.

[5] 5.Доклад группы ВОЗ по индукции родов. 2014 [Doklad gruppy VOZ po indukcii rodov. 2014 (In Russ.)]. Доступен по http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/9789241501156/ru/. Ссылка активна на 12.12.2014.

[6] 6.Рекомендации ВОЗ по индукции родов/ 2014 [Rekomendacii VOZ po indukcii rodov/ 2014 (In Russ.)]. Доступен по http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/44531/8/9789244501153_rus.pdf. Ссылка активна на 12.12.2014.

[7] 7.Alfirevic Z, Keeney E, Dowswell T, et al. Which method is best for the induction of labour? A systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Technol Assess. 2016;20(65):1-584. doi: 10.3310/hta20650.

[8] 8.Alfirevic Z, Hofmeyr GJ, Gülmezoglu AM. Misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;106(8):798-803.

[9] 9.ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(2 Pt 1):386-97. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b48ef5.

[10] 10.Toppozada MK, Anwar MY, Hassan HA, el-Gazaerly WS. Oral or vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1997;56(2):135-9. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7292(96)02805-6.

[11] 11.Караш Ю.М. Диагностика сократительной деятельности матки в родах. – М.: Медицина, 1982. [Karash JuM. Diagnostika sokratitel’noj dejatel’nosti matki v rodah. Moscow: Medicina; 1982. (In Russ.)]

[12] 12.Воскресенский С.Л., Шилкина Е.В., Зеленко Е.Н., и др. Активация родовой деятельности окситоцином — фактор риска гипоксии плода и новорожденного // Медицинские новости. – 2013. – № 2. – C. 51–54. [Voskresenskij SL, Shilkina EV, Zelenko EN, et al. Aktivacija rodovoj dejatel’nosti oksitocinom – faktor riska gipoksii ploda i novorozhdennogo. Medicinskie novostiju. 2013;(2):51-54. (In Russ.)]

[13] 13.Alfirevic Z, Keeney E, Dowswell T, et al. Labour induction with prostaglandins: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;350:h217. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h217.

[14] 14.Deshmukh VL, Yelikar KA, Waso VJ. Comparative study of efficacy and safety of oral versus vaginal misoprostol for induction or labour. Obstet Gynaecol India. 2013; 63(5):321-4. doi: 10.1007/s13224-012-0337-3.

[15] 15.Komala K, Reddy M, Quadri IJ. Comparative study of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour, maternal and foetal outcome. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(12): 2866-9. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/5825.3779.

[16] 16.Zieman M, Fong SK, Benowitz NL, et al. Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90(1):88-92. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00111-7.

[17] 17.Tang OS, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Ho PC. Misoprostol: pharmacokinetic profiles, effects on the uterus and side-effects. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;99(Suppl 2): S160-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.09.004.

[18] 18.Кoзонов Г.Р, Кузьминых Т.У., Толибова Г.Х., Траль Т.Г. Клиническое течение родов и патоморфологические особенности миометрия при дискоординации родовой деятельности // Журнал акушерства и женских болезней. – 2015. – Т. 64. – № 4. – C. 39–48. [Kozonov GR, Kuz´minykh TU, Tolibova GH, Tral´ TG. Clinical course of childbirth and pathomorphological features of the myometrium in discoordinated labor activity. Journal of Obstetrics and Women’s Diseases. 2015;64(4):39-48. (In Russ.)]

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Blagodarniy G.V., Mozgovaya E.V.