ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2019
Efficacy and safety of administering oral misoprostol by titration compared to vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02902653 (Efficacy and Safety of Hourly Titrated Misoprostol Versus Vaginal Dinoprostone and Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Efficacy and Safety of Hourly Titrated Misoprostol Versus Vaginal Dinoprostone and Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction: Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of misoprostol compared with dinoprostone for labor induction at term: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Labor induction with randomized comparison of cervical, oral and intravaginal misoprostol.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Trial
- Article
- Comparison of the efficacy of sublingual, oral, and vaginal administration of misoprostol in the medical treatment of missed abortion during first trimester of pregnancy: A randomized clinical trial study.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2020Article
- Maternal and fetal outcomes in women undergoing induction of labor with low dose vaginal misoprostol.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmong the various methods available, the administration of prostaglandins is the most effective for inducing labour in women with an unfavourable cervix. Recent studies have compared treatment with various titrated doses of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol or dinoprostone, indicating that the use of an escalating dose of an oral misoprostol solution is associated with a lower rate of caesarean sections and a better safety profile. The objective of this study is to assess which of these three therapeutic options (oral or vaginal misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone) achieves the highest rate of vaginal delivery within the first 24 h of drug administration.
methodsAn open-label randomised controlled trial will be conducted in Araba University Hospital (Spain). Women at ≥41 weeks of pregnancy requiring elective induction of labour who meet the selection criteria will be randomly allocated to one of three groups: 1) vaginal dinoprostone (delivered via a controlled-release vaginal insert containing 10 mg of dinoprostone, for up to 24 h); 2) vaginal misoprostol (25 μg of vaginal misoprostol every 4 h up to a maximum of 24 h); and 3) oral misoprostol (titrated doses of 20 to 60 μg of misoprostol following a 3 h on + 1 h off regimen up to a maximum of 24 h). Both intention-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis will be performed. DISCUSSION: The proposed study seeks to gather evidence on which of these three therapeutic options achieves the highest rate of vaginal delivery with the best safety profile, to enable obstetricians to use the most effective and safe option for their patients.
trial registrationNCT02902653 Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02902653 (7th September 2016).
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.