Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Reproductive Health 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Study protocol

Misoprostol administered sublingually at a dose of 12.5 μg versus vaginally at a dose of 25 μg for the induction of full-term labor: a randomized controlled trial protocol

Authors: Daniele Sofia Moraes Barros Gattás, José Roberto da Silva Junior, Alex Sandro Rolland Souza, Francisco Edson Feitosa, Melania Maria Ramos de Amorim

Published in: Reproductive Health | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Various methods are currently used for the induction of labor. Nevertheless, the most effective method with the fewest side effects remains to be established. Misoprostol, administered vaginally, has been routinely used for this purpose; however, other forms of administration are being proposed, including the use of sublingual tablets. No studies have yet compared the effectiveness and safety of 12.5-μg misoprostol administered sublingually compared to a 25-μg vaginal dose of the drug for the induction of labor.

Methods

A triple-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial will be conducted in Brazil at the Instituto de Medicina Integral Prof. Fernando Figueira and at the Assis Chateaubriand Maternity Teaching Hospital of the Federal University of Ceará. A total of 140 patients with full-term pregnancies, a live fetus, a Bishop score ≤ 6 and a recommendation of induction of labor will be randomized to one of two groups. One group will receive 12.5-μg sublingual tablets of misoprostol and placebo vaginal tablets, while the other group will receive placebo sublingual tablets and vaginal tablets containing 25 μg of misoprostol. The principal endpoint is the rate of tachysystole. The secondary endpoints are vaginal delivery within 24 h of induction, uterine hyperstimulation, Cesarean section, severe neonatal morbidity or perinatal death, severe maternal morbidity or maternal death, and maternal preference regarding the route of administration of the drug. Student’s t-test, and the chi-square test of association or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate, will be used in the data analysis. Risk ratios and their respective 95% confidence intervals will be calculated.

Discussion

Misoprostol has been identified as a safe, inexpensive, easily administered option for the induction of labor, with satisfactory results. An experimental study has shown that misoprostol administered sublingually at a dose of 25 μg appears to be effective and is associated with greater maternal satisfaction when labor is induced in women with an unfavorable cervix. Nevertheless, the rate of tachysystole remains high; therefore, further studies are required to determine the ideal dose and the ideal interval of time between doses.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT01406392.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Moraes Filho OB, Cecatti JG, FEL F. Métodos para indução do parto. Rev Bras Ginecol Obs. 2005;27:493–500.CrossRef Moraes Filho OB, Cecatti JG, FEL F. Métodos para indução do parto. Rev Bras Ginecol Obs. 2005;27:493–500.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Guerra GV, Cecatti JG, Souza JP, Faúndes A, Morais SS, Gülmezoglu AM, Parpinelli MA, Passini R, Carroli G. Factors and outcomes associated with the induction of labour in Latin America. BJOG. 2009;116:1762–72.CrossRefPubMed Guerra GV, Cecatti JG, Souza JP, Faúndes A, Morais SS, Gülmezoglu AM, Parpinelli MA, Passini R, Carroli G. Factors and outcomes associated with the induction of labour in Latin America. BJOG. 2009;116:1762–72.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Tang OS, Schweer H, Seyberth HW, Lee SWH, Ho PC. Pharmacokinetics of different routes of administration of misoprostol. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:332–6.CrossRefPubMed Tang OS, Schweer H, Seyberth HW, Lee SWH, Ho PC. Pharmacokinetics of different routes of administration of misoprostol. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:332–6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Margulies M, Voto LS, Catuzzi PIF. Inducción del trabajo de parto con un análogo de la PGE1. Prensa Med Arg. 1991;78:9–13. Margulies M, Voto LS, Catuzzi PIF. Inducción del trabajo de parto con un análogo de la PGE1. Prensa Med Arg. 1991;78:9–13.
5.
go back to reference Feitosa FEL, Sampaio ZS, Alencar CA, Amorim MMR, Passini R. Sublingual vs. vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;94:91–5.CrossRefPubMed Feitosa FEL, Sampaio ZS, Alencar CA, Amorim MMR, Passini R. Sublingual vs. vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;94:91–5.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for induction of labour. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for induction of labour. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.
10.
go back to reference Souza ASR, Amorim MMR, Feitosa FEL. Comparison of sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour: a systematic review. BJOG. 2008;115:1340–9.CrossRefPubMed Souza ASR, Amorim MMR, Feitosa FEL. Comparison of sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour: a systematic review. BJOG. 2008;115:1340–9.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Gattás DS, Souza AS, Souza CG, Florentino AV, Nóbrega BV, Fook VP, Amorim MM. Low dose of sublingual misoprostol (12.5 μg) for labor induction. Rev Bras Ginecol Obs. 2012;34:164–9. Gattás DS, Souza AS, Souza CG, Florentino AV, Nóbrega BV, Fook VP, Amorim MM. Low dose of sublingual misoprostol (12.5 μg) for labor induction. Rev Bras Ginecol Obs. 2012;34:164–9.
12.
go back to reference Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001;357:1191–4.CrossRefPubMed Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet. 2001;357:1191–4.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Misoprostol administered sublingually at a dose of 12.5 μg versus vaginally at a dose of 25 μg for the induction of full-term labor: a randomized controlled trial protocol
Authors
Daniele Sofia Moraes Barros Gattás
José Roberto da Silva Junior
Alex Sandro Rolland Souza
Francisco Edson Feitosa
Melania Maria Ramos de Amorim
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Reproductive Health / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1742-4755
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-018-0508-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Reproductive Health 1/2018 Go to the issue