Efficacy and safety of oral and sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:3
|
作者
Pergialiotis, Vasilios [1 ]
Panagiotopoulos, Michail [1 ]
Constantinou, Therapon [2 ]
Vogiatzi Vokotopoulou, Lito [1 ]
Koumenis, Andreas [2 ]
Stavros, Sofoklis [1 ]
Voskos, Andreas [2 ]
Daskalakis, George [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Alexandra Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol 1, Lourou 2-4, Athens 11528, Greece
[2] Lab Expt Surg & Surg Res NS Christeas, Athens, Greece
关键词
Misoprostol; Oral; Sublingual; Induction of labour; Maternal morbidity; Neonatal morbidity; Systematic review; Meta-analysis; 25; MU-G; INTRAVAGINAL MISOPROSTOL; TERM; BLIND; ROUTES; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1007/s00404-022-06867-9
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective Misoprostol is a synthetic PGE(1) analogue that is used for induction of labour. Current guidelines support the use of doses that do not exceed 25 mcg in order to limit maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. The present meta-analysis investigates the efficacy and safety of oral compared to vaginally inserted misoprostol in terms of induction of labor and adverse peripartum outcomes. Methods We searched Medline, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials CENTRAL, Google Scholar, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception till April 2022. Randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of oral misoprostol (per os or sublingual) compared to vaginally inserted misoprostol. Effect sizes were calculated in R. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the possibility of small study effects, p-hacking. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis according to the dose of misoprostol was also investigated. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed by two independent reviewers using the risk of bias 2 tool. Quality of evidence for primary outcomes was evaluated under the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework, ranging from very low to high. Results Overall, 57 studies were included that involved 10,975 parturient. Their risk of bias ranged between low-moderate. There were no differences among the routes of intake in terms of successful vaginal delivery within 24 h (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80) and cesarean section rates (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82, 1.04). Sublingual misoprostol was superior compared to vaginal misoprostol in reducing the interval from induction to delivery (MD - 1.11 h, 95% CI - 2.06, - 0.17). On the other hand, per os misoprostol was inferior compared to vaginal misoprostol in terms of this outcome (MD 3.45 h, 95% CI 1.85, 5.06). Maternal and neonatal morbidity was not affected by the route or dose of misoprostol. Conclusion The findings of our study suggest that oral misoprostol intake is equally safe to vaginal misoprostol in terms of inducing labor at term. Sublingual intake seems to outperform the per os and vaginal routes without increasing the accompanying morbidity. Increasing the dose of misoprostol does not seem to increase its efficacy.
引用
收藏
页码:727 / 775
页数:49
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Intravaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter for labour induction: a meta-analysis
    Fox, N. S.
    Saltzman, D. H.
    Roman, A. S.
    Klauser, C. K.
    Moshier, E.
    Rebarber, A.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2011, 118 (06) : 647 - 654
  • [32] Sublingual compared with oral and vaginal misoprostol for labor induction
    Elhassan, E. M.
    Nasr, A. M.
    Adam, I.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2007, 97 (02) : 153 - 154
  • [33] Efficacy and safety of oral phenylephrine: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Hatton, Randy C.
    Winterstein, Almut G.
    McKelvey, Russell P.
    Shuster, Jonathan
    Hendeles, Leslie
    ANNALS OF PHARMACOTHERAPY, 2007, 41 (03) : 381 - 390
  • [34] Efficacy of Vaginal Misoprostol versus Sublingual Misoprostol in the Management of Early Miscarriage
    Ehsan, Naila
    Shoaib, Maryam
    Salam, Rohana
    Naeem, Sakina
    Saifullah, Samia
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL & HEALTH SCIENCES, 2020, 14 (02): : 266 - 268
  • [35] Inducing labor after fetal demise: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of mifepristone and misoprostol combination versus misoprostol alone
    Maryam Shami
    Mona Larki
    Somayeh Makvandi
    Mahnaz Azari
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 25 (1)
  • [36] Effectiveness and safety of herbal medicines for induction of labour: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zamawe, Collins
    King, Carina
    Jennings, Hannah Maria
    Mandiwa, Chrispin
    Fottrell, Edward
    BMJ OPEN, 2018, 8 (10):
  • [37] Efficacy, Safety, and Acceptability of Misoprostol in the Treatment of Incomplete Miscarriage: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    da Silva, Thiago Menezes
    de Araujo, Moema Alves Guerra
    Simoes, Ana Carolina Zimmermann
    de Oliveira, Ronnier
    de Medeiros, Kleyton Santos
    Sarmento, Ayane Cristine
    de Medeiros, Robinson Dias
    Costa, Ana Paula Ferreira
    Goncalves, Ana Katherine
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE GINECOLOGIA E OBSTETRICIA, 2023, 45 (12): : E808 - E817
  • [38] Efficacy and safety of misoprostol vaginal insert vs. oral misoprostol for induction of labor
    Redling, Katharina
    Schaedelin, Sabine
    Huhn, Evelyn Annegret
    Hoesli, Irene
    JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE, 2019, 47 (02) : 176 - 182
  • [39] Oral Misoprostol for Induction of Labour in Term PROM: A Systematic Review
    Padayachee, Larissa
    Kale, Mruganka
    Mannerfeldt, Jaelene
    Metcalfe, Amy
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY CANADA, 2020, 42 (12) : 1525 - +
  • [40] Efficacy and safety of oral versus intranasal midazolam as premedication in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chen, Shouming
    Lang, Bingchen
    Wu, Lan
    Zhang, Wensheng
    MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2023, 89 (04) : 331 - 340