A. Khoury, Qianyun Zhou, D. Gorenberg, B. Nies, G. E. Manley, F. Mecklenburg
{"title":"阴道间歇给药两种不同剂量米索前列醇栓剂与连续地诺前列酮用于宫颈成熟和引产的比较","authors":"A. Khoury, Qianyun Zhou, D. Gorenberg, B. Nies, G. E. Manley, F. Mecklenburg","doi":"10.1080/jmf.10.3.186.192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose : To compare the efficacy of a vaginal insert administering continuous dinoprostone with vaginal suppositories containing two different doses of misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Study design : In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 118 patients with indications for induction of labor and an unfavorable Bishop score were randomly assigned to receive either continuous dinoprostone, misoprostol 35- w g suppositories, or misoprostol 50- w g suppositories. Results : No significant differences were noted among the three groups in the change of Bishop score, induction of active labor or the time from initial treatment to delivery. Active labor occurred in roughly two-thirds of the patients in an average of about 5.7-6.7 h regardless of treatment assignment. When the two misoprostol groups were combined, a shorter interval from insertion to vaginal delivery was observed in the nulliparous women receiving misoprostol than those receiving continuous dinoprostone (21.3 vs. 27.2 h, p = 0.019). Except for the significantly lower incidence of tachysystole observed in the combined misoprostol group (3.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.036), there were no other significant differences between the groups in mode of delivery or in adverse maternal, fetal, or neonatal effects. Conclusion : Misoprostol suppositories appeared to be as effective and safe as continuous dinoprostone in inducing cervical ripening in this sample.","PeriodicalId":79464,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of maternal-fetal medicine","volume":"10 1","pages":"186 - 192"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/jmf.10.3.186.192","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of two different doses of misoprostol suppositories with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction\",\"authors\":\"A. Khoury, Qianyun Zhou, D. Gorenberg, B. Nies, G. E. Manley, F. Mecklenburg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/jmf.10.3.186.192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose : To compare the efficacy of a vaginal insert administering continuous dinoprostone with vaginal suppositories containing two different doses of misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Study design : In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 118 patients with indications for induction of labor and an unfavorable Bishop score were randomly assigned to receive either continuous dinoprostone, misoprostol 35- w g suppositories, or misoprostol 50- w g suppositories. Results : No significant differences were noted among the three groups in the change of Bishop score, induction of active labor or the time from initial treatment to delivery. Active labor occurred in roughly two-thirds of the patients in an average of about 5.7-6.7 h regardless of treatment assignment. When the two misoprostol groups were combined, a shorter interval from insertion to vaginal delivery was observed in the nulliparous women receiving misoprostol than those receiving continuous dinoprostone (21.3 vs. 27.2 h, p = 0.019). Except for the significantly lower incidence of tachysystole observed in the combined misoprostol group (3.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.036), there were no other significant differences between the groups in mode of delivery or in adverse maternal, fetal, or neonatal effects. Conclusion : Misoprostol suppositories appeared to be as effective and safe as continuous dinoprostone in inducing cervical ripening in this sample.\",\"PeriodicalId\":79464,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of maternal-fetal medicine\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"186 - 192\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2001-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/jmf.10.3.186.192\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of maternal-fetal medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/jmf.10.3.186.192\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of maternal-fetal medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/jmf.10.3.186.192","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17
摘要
目的:比较阴道插入剂连续使用米索前列醇与阴道栓剂含两种不同剂量米索前列醇用于宫颈成熟和引产的效果。研究设计:在这项前瞻性、随机、双盲研究中,118名有引产指征且Bishop评分不理想的患者被随机分配到连续使用迪诺前列酮、米索前列醇35- w g栓剂或米索前列醇50- w g栓剂。结果:三组患者在Bishop评分变化、主动产程诱导及初治至分娩时间方面均无显著差异。无论治疗方案如何,大约三分之二的患者在平均5.7-6.7小时内发生了主动分娩。当两组米索前列醇联合使用时,接受米索前列醇的未产妇女从插入到阴道分娩的间隔时间比连续接受迪诺前列醇的妇女短(21.3 h对27.2 h, p = 0.019)。除了联合米索前列醇组的心动过速发生率显著降低(3.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.036)外,两组在分娩方式或母体、胎儿或新生儿不良反应方面没有其他显著差异。结论:米索前列醇栓剂在促进宫颈成熟方面与连续的迪诺前列酮一样有效和安全。
A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of two different doses of misoprostol suppositories with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction
Purpose : To compare the efficacy of a vaginal insert administering continuous dinoprostone with vaginal suppositories containing two different doses of misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Study design : In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, 118 patients with indications for induction of labor and an unfavorable Bishop score were randomly assigned to receive either continuous dinoprostone, misoprostol 35- w g suppositories, or misoprostol 50- w g suppositories. Results : No significant differences were noted among the three groups in the change of Bishop score, induction of active labor or the time from initial treatment to delivery. Active labor occurred in roughly two-thirds of the patients in an average of about 5.7-6.7 h regardless of treatment assignment. When the two misoprostol groups were combined, a shorter interval from insertion to vaginal delivery was observed in the nulliparous women receiving misoprostol than those receiving continuous dinoprostone (21.3 vs. 27.2 h, p = 0.019). Except for the significantly lower incidence of tachysystole observed in the combined misoprostol group (3.8% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.036), there were no other significant differences between the groups in mode of delivery or in adverse maternal, fetal, or neonatal effects. Conclusion : Misoprostol suppositories appeared to be as effective and safe as continuous dinoprostone in inducing cervical ripening in this sample.