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
  • [41] Comparison of sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for second-trimester pregnancy termination: A meta-analysis
    Cabrera, Yasmina
    Fernandez-Guisasola, Jaime
    Lobo, Paloma
    Gamir, Susana
    Alvarez, Julio
    AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2011, 51 (02): : 158 - 165
  • [42] Vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: An individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    Patabendige, Malitha
    Chan, Fei
    Vayssiere, Christophe
    Ehlinger, Virginie
    Van Gemund, Nicolette
    Le Cessie, Saskia
    Prager, Martina
    Marions, Lena
    Rozenberg, Patrick
    Chevret, Sylvie
    Young, David C.
    Le Roux, Paul A.
    Gregson, Sarah
    Waterstone, Mark
    Rolnik, Daniel L.
    Mol, Ben W.
    Li, Wentao
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2024, 131 (09) : 1167 - 1180
  • [43] Efficacy and safety of miconazole for oral candidiasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zhang, L-W
    Fu, J-Y
    Hua, H.
    Yan, Z-M
    ORAL DISEASES, 2016, 22 (03) : 185 - 195
  • [44] Misoprostol in labour induction of term pregnancy: a meta-analysis
    李小毛
    万璟
    许成芳
    张宇
    方莉
    史众杰
    李凯
    中华医学杂志(英文版), 2004, (03) : 130 - 133
  • [45] Misoprostol in labour induction of term pregnancy: a meta-analysis
    李小毛
    万璟
    许成芳
    张宇
    方莉
    史众杰
    李凯
    Chinese Medical Journal, 2004, (03)
  • [46] Misoprostol in labour induction of term pregnancy: a meta-analysis
    Li, XM
    Wan, J
    Xu, CF
    Zhang, Y
    Fang, L
    Shi, ZJ
    Li, K
    CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2004, 117 (03) : 449 - 452
  • [47] Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study
    Bolla, Daniele
    Weissleder, Saskia Vanessa
    Radan, Anda-Petronela
    Gasparri, Maria Luisa
    Raio, Luigi
    Mueller, Martin
    Surbek, Daniel
    BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2018, 18
  • [48] Sublingual versus Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction of Term Pregnancies
    de Moraes Filho, Olimpio Barbosa
    de Albuquerque, Rivaldo Mendes
    Correia Pacheco, Alvaro Jose
    Ribeiro, Renata Holanda
    Cecatti, Jose Guilherme
    Welkovic, Stefan
    REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE GINECOLOGIA E OBSTETRICIA, 2005, 27 (01): : 24 - 31
  • [49] Misoprostol for induction of labour:: a systematic review
    Hofmeyr, GJ
    Gülmezoglu, AM
    Alfirevic, Z
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 1999, 106 (08): : 798 - 803
  • [50] Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study
    Daniele Bolla
    Saskia Vanessa Weissleder
    Anda-Petronela Radan
    Maria Luisa Gasparri
    Luigi Raio
    Martin Müller
    Daniel Surbek
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18