ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2012
Vaginal Misoprostol vs Vaginal Misoprostol With Estradiol for Labor Induction: A Prospective Double Blind Study.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Labor induction with randomized comparison of cervical, oral and intravaginal misoprostol.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Trial
- Loss of progesterone receptor-mediated actions induce preterm cellular and structural remodeling of the cervix and premature birth.PloS one · 2013Article
- Androgens in pregnancy: roles in parturition.Human reproduction updateReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the safety and effectiveness of vaginal misoprostol with combined vaginal misoprostol and estradiol for induction of labor in unfavorable cervix.
methodA prospective study was carried out from Jan 2008 to Jul 2008 on total of 90 women with unfavorable cervix (Bishop's score was <5) and gestation >36 weeks with clinical indication for induction of labor. They were randomly assigned to receive either vaginal misoprostol 25 μg alone or vaginal misoprostol 25 μg with vaginal estradiol 50 μg. Misoprostol alone was repeated every 3 h in both groups till ripening of cervix (Bishop's score was = 8) and establishment of active labor.
resultsMain indications were post dated pregnancies (period of gestation >41 weeks) and pregnancy induced hypertension. Age, parity and mode of delivery were not significantly different. No significant difference was found in pre induction Bishop's score, fetal outcome and maternal complications. However, doses of misoprostol required for cervical ripening (p = 0.017), time required for cervical ripening (p = 0.042), time required for starting of active labor (p = 0.017) and time required for delivery in vaginal delivery cases (p = 0.047) were found significantly less in combined estradiol and misoprostol group.
conclusionEstradiol acts synergistically with misoprostol vaginally and significantly hastens the process of cervical ripening, initiation of active labor and vaginal delivery.
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.