SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000
Oral misoprostol for induction of labour with a viable fetus.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Misoprostol to prevent and treat postpartum haemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of maternal deaths and dose-related effects.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2009Pooled it
- Influence of nursing interventions in improving midwives' knowledge of misoprostol use in the management of postpartum haemorrhage at selected hospitals in Ondo State, Nigeria.The Pan African medical journal · 2021Trial
- A Relative Bioavailability Study of Two Misoprostol Formulations Following a Single Oral or Sublingual Administration.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMisoprostol is a synthetic prostaglandin which has been used to induce labour. Oral use of the drug misoprostol may be convenient, but an overdose could cause uterine hyperstimulation and precipitate labour which may be life-threatening for both mother and fetus.
objectivesThe objective of this review was to assess the effects of oral misoprostol used for labour induction in women with a viable fetus. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of oral misoprostol versus any other method, placebo or no treatment given to women with a viable fetus for induction of labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The selection of trials and data extraction were undertaken by one reviewer and independently checked by two other reviewers. MAIN
resultsFive trials were included. In one placebo trial, oral misoprostol reduced the need for oxytocin infusion and shortened delivery time in women with prelabour rupture of membranes at term. In another trial, compared to vaginal prostaglandins, oral misoprostol reduced the need for oxytocin (relative risk 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.47 to 0.82). Based on two trials, the caesarean section rate with oral misoprostol was 20. 2% (55/272) compared with 15.5% (42/270) for vaginal prostaglandins (relative risk 1.29, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.86). Different doses (100 micrograms three hourly and 200 micrograms six hourly) were used in the two trials that compared oral with vaginal misoprostol. The caesarean section rate was 21.8% in the oral misoprostol group compared with 13.5% for vaginal misoprostol (relative risk 1.62, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 3.09). The uterine hyperstimulation rate with oral misoprostol was 37.5% (36/96) compared with 28% (25/89) for vaginal misoprostol (relative risk 1.32, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 2.04). There was significant heterogeneity between these two trials. REVIEWER'S
conclusionsOral misoprostol may be an effective method for labour induction. However clinically effective oral regimens may have an unacceptably high incidence of uterine hyperstimulation and possibly uterine rupture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.