Comparative Cross-Sectional Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Sublingual Misoprostol versus Intravaginal Dinoprostone for Labor Induction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51985/Keywords:
Cesarean Section, Dinoprostone, Fetal Distress, Labor Induction, Misoprostol, PregnancyAbstract
Objective: The investigation aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of sublingual misoprostol compared with intravaginal dinoprostone for labor induction at Maroof International Hospital.
Study Design and Setting: A comparative cross-sectional study was carried out in the Obstetrics Department, Maroof International Hospital from 1 August 2023 to 30 September 2024, including 219 pregnant women aged between 18 and 40 years and gestation periods ranging from 37 to 42 weeks.
Methodology: Participants were randomly allocated to receive either sublingual misoprostol (50 mcg every 4 hours, up to 6 doses) or intravaginal dinoprostone (3 mg every 6 hours). The study assessed the interval between induction and delivery, delivery method, induction failure, and adverse consequences including gastrointestinal problems and fetal distress. Data analysis was conducted utilizing SPSS, with a significance threshold established at p < 0.05.
Results: Misoprostol markedly decreased the induction-to-delivery interval (8.4 vs. 10.2 hours, p < 0.05). Nonetheless, it was linked to an increased incidence of cesarean sections (12.5% compared to 5%), predominantly attributable to fetal discomfort. Misoprostol also elevated the occurrence of nausea and vomiting in comparison to dinoprostone. Conclusion: Sublingual misoprostol reduced induction-to-delivery time but increased adverse effects and cesarean sections. Misoprostol for labor induction requires careful monitoring to balance efficacy and safety.
References
1. Patabendige M, Rolnik DL, Li W, Weeks AD, Mol BW. How
labor induction methods have evolved throughout history,
from the Egyptian era to the present day: evolution,
effectiveness, and safety. American journal of obstetrics &
gynecology MFM. 2024;7(1):101515. https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.ajogmf.2024.101515
2. Lewis S, Zhao Z, Schorn M. Elective induction of labor or
expectant management: outcomes among nulliparous women
with uncomplicated pregnancies. Journal of Midwifery &
Women's Health. 2022 Mar;67(2):170-7. https://doi.org/
10.1111/jmwh.13313
3. Polónia-Valente R, Costa S, Coimbra C, Xavier J, Figueiredo
R, Ferraz T, et al. Labor induction with a combined method
(pharmacologic and mechanical): a randomized controlled
trial. Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and Human
Reproduction. 2023;52(9):102649. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jogoh.2023.102649
4. Lakho N, Hyder M, Ashraf T, Khan S, Kumar A, Jabbar M,
et al. Efficacy and safety of misoprostol compared with
dinoprostone for labor induction at term: an updated systematic
review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Frontiers in Medicine. 2024;11:1459793. https://doi.org/
10.3389/fmed.2024.1459793
5. Taliento C, Manservigi M, Tormen M, Cappadona R, Piccolotti
I, Salvioli S, Scutiero G, Greco P. Safety of misoprostol vs
dinoprostone for induction of labor: A systematic review and
meta-analysis. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
and Reproductive Biology. 2023 Oct 1;289:108-28. https://doi.
org/10.3109/14767058.2015.1046828
6. Di Tommaso M, Pellegrini R, Ammar O, Lecis S, Huri M,
Facchinetti F. Safety of the use of dinoprostone gel and vaginal
insert for induction of labor: A multicenter retrospective cohort
study. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics.
2025;168(3):1039-46. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15952
7. Ahn H. Imaging in Acute Obstetric Conditions: A Pictorial
Essay. Korean Journal of Radiology. 2025;26. https://doi.org/
10.3348/kjr.2025.0037
8. Chaudhary S, Anjum HH, Khan MU, Khurram A, Nazim U,
Dar MM. A Systematic Review On Complications of
Intrahepatic Cholestasis of Pregnancy. Pakistan Journal of
Medical & Health Sciences. 2022 Dec 20;16(10):894-.
https://doi.org/10.53350/pjmhs221610894
9. Galan HL, Huguelet T, editors. Emergencies in Obstetrics
and Gynecology, an Issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Clinics, E-Book: Emergencies in Obstetrics and Gynecology,
an Issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics, E-Book.
Elsevier Health Sciences; 2022 Sep 21. https://books.google.
com.pk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mPSKEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd
&pg=PP1&dq=Sullivan+C,+et+al.+Sublingual+Misoprosto
l+for+Labor+Induction.+Am+J+Obstet+Gynecol.+2017%3
B+216(1):+5662.&ots=tCYimyjNai&sig=0U17pZQIBUlD
vllgIq4YvVlQXV8&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
10. Chua JYX, Choolani M, Lalor JG, Yi H, Chong YS, Shorey
S. Perceptions of healthcare professionals regarding labour
induction and augmentation: A qualitative systematic review.
Women and Birth. 2024;37(1):79-87. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.wombi.2023.09.003
11. Ansar H. Framing Misoprostol Programs in Pakistan Within
a Postcolonial Context: The Ohio State University; 2022.
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu16505615
25188022
12. Israr M, Noor-e-Marfa Amin TM, Khan SY, Basit A.
Contemporary-Issues-in-Health Contemporary Issues in
H e a l t h : A J P O J o u r n a l s U S A L L C ; 2 0 2 3 .
https://books.google.com.pk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=FKLU
EAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA4&dq=Israr+M,+Noor-eMarfa+Amin+TM,+Khan+SY,+Basit+A.+ContemporaryIssues-in-Health+Contemporary+ Issues+in+Health:+AJPO
+Journals+USA+LLC%3 B+2023&ots=0 sKIMDp
SKI&sig=Xl60QL8tW5RlBV0BlydDt-RpEfk&redir_esc
=y#v=onepage& q&f=false
13. Ratiu O, Ratiu D, Mallmann P, Di Liberto A, Ertan AK,
Morgenstern B, Mallmann MR, Ludwig S, Gruettner B,
Eichler C, Thangarajah F. Oral Misoprostol for the Induction
of Labor: Comparison of Different Dosage Schemes With
Respect to Maternal and Fetal Outcome in Patients Beyond
34 Weeks of Pregnancy. in vivo. 2022 May 1;36(3):1285-
9.DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12828
14. Ramadan M, Bashour G, Eldokmery E, Alkhawajah A, Alsalhi
K, Badr Y, et al. The efficacy and safety of oral and vaginal
misoprostol versus dinoprostone on women experiencing
labor: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis of 53
randomized controlled trials. Medicine. 2024;103(40):e39861.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000039861
15. Young DC, Delaney T, Armson BA, Fanning C. Oral
misoprostol, low dose vaginal misoprostol, and vaginal
dinoprostone for labor induction: Randomized controlled trial.
PloS one. 2020;15(1):e0227245. DOI: 10.1097/MD. 0000000
000039861
16. Chang TA, Li YR, Ding DC. Oxytocin and vaginal
dinoprostone in labor induction: A systematic review and
meta-analysis. International Journal of Gynecology &
Obstetrics. 2024;166(2):626-38. https://doi.org/10.1002
/ijgo.15443
17. Huang H, Ding G, Li M, Deng Y, Cheng Y, Jin H. Menopause
and stress urinary incontinence: the risk factors of stress
urinary incontinence in perimenopausal and postmenopausal
women. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research.
2023;49(10):2509-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.15742
18. Fatima T, Jabeen F, Mukhtar B. Effectiveness of oral PGE1
Versus Intracervical PGE2 in induction of labor. Journal of
The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Pakistan.
2024;14(1):11-5. https://jsogp.net/index.php/ jsogp/article/
view/679 /831
19. Mukherjee S, Valson H, Balaji K. A study of effect of oral
PGE1 and cervical PGE2 on induction of labor and mode of
delivery. International Journal of Reproduction, Contraception,
Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2018 Jun 1;7(6):2161.
DOI:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20181995
20. Psyche V. Category–Sexual Health and Contraception. 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.whi.2020.10.003
21. Mendez-Figueroa H, Bicocca MJ, Gupta M, Wagner SM,
Chauhan SP. Labor induction with prostaglandin E1 versus
E2: a comparison of outcomes. Journal of Perinatology.
2021;41(4):726-35. DOI https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-020-
00888-5
22. Curtis KM. US selected practice recommendations for
contraceptive use, 2024. MMWR Recommendationsand
Reports.2024;73.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/73/rr
/rr7303a1.htm?scid=rr7303a1w
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Journal of Bahria University Medical & Dental College is an open access journal and is licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0. which permits unrestricted non commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
