Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-01-2019 | Maternal-Fetal Medicine

Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Purpose

To provide real-world evidence using misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI) for induction of labor in nulliparous and parous women at two German Level I Centers in a prospective observational study.

Methods

Between 1 August 2014 and 1 October 2015, eligible pregnant women (≥ 36 + 0 weeks of gestation) requiring labor induction were treated with MVI. Endpoints included time to and mode of delivery rates of tocolysis use, tachysystole, uterine hypertonus or uterine hyperstimulation syndrome and newborn outcomes.

Results

Of the 354 women enrolled, 68.9% (244/354) achieved vaginal delivery (nulliparous, 139/232 [59.9%]; parous 105/122 [86.1%]; p < 0.001). Median time from MVI administration to vaginal delivery was 14.0 h (nulliparous, 14.5 h; parous, 11.9 h; p < 0.001). A total of 205/244 (84.0%) and 228/244 (93.4%) women achieved a vaginal delivery within 24 h and 30 h, respectively. The most common indications for cesarean delivery were pathologic cardiotocography (nulliparous, 41/232 [17.4%]; parous, 13/122 [10.7%]; p = 0.081) and arrested labor (dilation or descent; nulliparous, 45/232 [19.4%], parous, 3/122 [2.5%]; p ≤ 0.001). A total of 24.3% of women experienced uterine tachysystole and 9.6% experienced uterine tachysystole with fetal heart rate involvement, neither of which were significantly different for nulliparous and parous women. In total, 42/345 (12.2%) of the neonates had an arterial pH < 7.15 and 12/345 3.5% had a 5-min Apgar score ≤ 7.

Conclusion

When clinically indicated, MVI was efficient and safe for induction of labor in women with an unfavorable cervix. Women, however, should be counseled regarding the risk of uterine tachysystole prior to labor induction with MVI.

Justus Hofmeyr G (2003) Induction of labour with an unfavourable cervix. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 17(5):777–794CrossRefPubMed

Tenore JL (2003) Methods for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Am Fam Physician 67(10):2123–2128PubMed

Sanchez-Ramos L (2005) Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 32(2):181–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogc.2004.12.004 CrossRefPubMed

Wagner M (2005) Off-label use of misoprostol in obstetrics: a cautionary tale. BJOG 112(3):266–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00445.x CrossRefPubMed

Mysodelle 200 micrograms vaginal delivery system SmPC. https://www.medicines.org.uk/emc/product/3436/smpc. Accessed 26 Oct 2018

Dobert M, Brandstetter A, Henrich W, Rawnaq T, Hasselbeck H, Dobert TF, Hinkson L, Schwaerzler P (2017) The misoprostol vaginal insert compared with oral misoprostol for labor induction in term pregnancies: a pair-matched case-control study. J Perinat Med 46:309–316. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2017-0049 CrossRef

Wing DA, Brown R, Plante LA, Miller H, Rugarn O, Powers BL (2013) Misoprostol vaginal insert and time to vaginal delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 122(2 Pt 1):201–209. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31829a2dd6 CrossRefPubMed

Chioss G, Costantine MM, Bytautiene E, Betancourt A, Hankins GD, Saade GR, Longo M (2012) In vitro myometrial contractility profiles of different pharmacological agents used for induction of labor. Am J Perinatol 29(9):699–704. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1314891 CrossRefPubMed

Chiossi G, Costantine MM, Bytautiene E, Kechichian T, Hankins GD, Sbrana E, Saade GR, Longo M (2012) The effects of prostaglandin E1 and prostaglandin E2 on in vitro myometrial contractility and uterine structure. Am J Perinatol 29(8):615–622. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1311986 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Wing DA, Miller H, Parker L, Powers BL, Rayburn WF, Misoprostol Vaginal Insert Miso-Obs I (2011) Misoprostol vaginal insert for successful labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 117(3):533–541. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318209d669 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Wing DA (2008) Misoprostol vaginal insert compared with dinoprostone vaginal insert: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 112(4):801–812. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318187042e CrossRefPubMed

12.

Shetty A, Burt R, Rice P, Templeton A (2005) Women’s perceptions, expectations and satisfaction with induced labour–a questionnaire-based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 123(1):56–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.03.004 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Voigt F, Goecke TW, Najjari L, Pecks U, Maass N, Rath W (2015) Off-label use of misoprostol for labor induction in Germany: a national survey. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 187:85–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2014.11.026 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Weeks AD, Fiala C, Safar P (2005) Misoprostol and the debate over off-label drug use. BJOG 112(3):269–272. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2004.00490.x CrossRefPubMed

15.

Dobert M, Brandstetter A, Henrich W, Rawnaq T, Hasselbeck H, Dobert TF, Hinkson L, Schwaerzler P (2018) The misoprostol vaginal insert compared with oral misoprostol for labor induction in term pregnancies: a pair-matched case-control study. J Perinat Med 46(3):309–316. https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2017-0049 CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bolla D, Weissleder SV, Radan AP, Gasparri ML, Raio L, Muller M, Surbek D (2018) Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 18(1):149. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1788-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

MacVicar J (1971) Failed induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw 78(11):1007–1009CrossRefPubMed

18.

Mayer RB, Oppelt P, Shebl O, Pomer J, Allerstorfer C, Weiss C (2016) Initial clinical experience with a misoprostol vaginal insert in comparison with a dinoprostone insert for inducing labor. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 200:89–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.03.008 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Jagielska I, Kazdepka-Zieminska A, Tyloch M, Soponska-Brzoszczyk P, Nowak K, Dziedzic D, Dzikowska E, Grabiec M (2017) Obstetric outcomes of pre-induction of labor with a 200 mug misoprostol vaginal insert. Ginekol Pol 88(11):606–612. https://doi.org/10.5603/GP.a2017.0109 CrossRefPubMed

20.

Rugarn O, Tipping D, Powers B, Wing DA (2017) Induction of labour with retrievable prostaglandin vaginal inserts: outcomes following retrieval due to an intrapartum adverse event. BJOG 124(5):796–803. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.14147 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Davey MA, King J (2016) Caesarean section following induction of labour in uncomplicated first births- a population-based cross-sectional analysis of 42,950 births. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 16:92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-0869-0 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

McMaster K, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM (2015) Balancing the efficacy and safety of misoprostol: a meta-analysis comparing 25 versus 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour. BJOG 122(4):468–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.12935 CrossRefPubMed

23.

Hofmeyr GJ, Gulmezoglu AM, Pileggi C (2010) Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd000941.pub2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Yeh P, Emary K, Impey L (2012) The relationship between umbilical cord arterial pH and serious adverse neonatal outcome: analysis of 51,519 consecutive validated samples. BJOG 119(7):824–831. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03335.x CrossRefPubMed

25.

World Health Organization WHO recommendations for Induction of labour (2011). Available from. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241501156_eng.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2018

26.

Surbek D, Hösli I, Irion O, Zimmermann R, Vail Y (2017) Expertenbrief SGGG Nr. 49. Misodel und Misoprostol zur Geburtseinleitung. Gynäkologie 3:27–29. http://www.sggg.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/Formulardaten/49_Misodel_und_Misoprostol__off-label__zur_Geburtseinleitung_ersetzt_No_38.pdf. Accessed 25 June 2018

Title: Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study
Publication date: 01-01-2019
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 1/2019
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-018-4942-y

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Reply to letter to the editor

Malignant transformation of adenomyosis: literature review and meta-analysis

Bleeding control using intrauterine continuous running suture during cesarean section in pregnant women with placenta previa

Five cases of uterine perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComas) and review of literature

Mesothelin as a target for cervical cancer therapy

The influence of partnership quality and breastfeeding on postpartum female sexual function