Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T03:30:30.853Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 60 - Induction of Labor and Termination of the Previable Pregnancy

from Section 6 - Late Prenatal – Obstetric Problems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2017

By
Luis Sanchez-Ramos  and
Isaac Delke
Edited by
David James ,
Philip Steer ,
Carl Weiner ,
Bernard Gonik  and
Stephen Robson
David James
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Philip Steer
Affiliation:
Imperial College London
Carl Weiner
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Bernard Gonik
Affiliation:
Wayne State University, Detroit
Stephen Robson
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle
Get access

Summary

Labor induction is the stimulation of regular uterine contractions before the spontaneous onset of labor, using mechanical or pharmacologic methods in order to generate progressive cervical dilatation and subsequent delivery. Although the term generally refers to patients who are at term, it is also employed for women from 20 weeks’ gestation. It is important to distinguish labor induction from augmentation, which refers to stimulation of uterine contractions when spontaneous contractions during labor have been considered inadequate.

Type
Chapter
Information
High-Risk Pregnancy
Management Options
 , pp. 1708 - 1748
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
First published in: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Osterman, MJK, Martin, JA. Recent declines in induction of labor by gestational age. NCHS Data Brief 2014; 155: 1–8.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists. Assessment of Fetal Lung Maturity. ACOG Educational Bulletin No. 230. Washington, DC: ACOG, 1996.Google Scholar
Calkins, LA, Irvine, JH, Horsley, GW. Variation in the length of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1930; 19: 294–7.Google Scholar
Bishop, EH. Elective induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1955; 5: 519–27.Google ScholarPubMed
Poma, PA. Cervical ripening: a review and recommendations for clinical practice. J Reprod Med 1999; 44: 657–68.Google Scholar
Xenakis, EMJ, Piper, JM, Conway, DL, et al. Induction of labor in the nineties: conquering the unfavorable cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 235–9.Google Scholar
Kolkman, DGE, Verhoeven, CJM, Brinkhorst, SJ, et al. The Bishop score as a predictor of labor induction success: a systematic review. Am J Perinatol 2013; 30; 625–30.Google Scholar
Ware, V, Raynor, BD. Transvaginal ulrasonographic cervical measurement as a predictor of successful labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1030–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabriel, R, Darnaud, T, Chalot, F, et al. Transvaginal sonography of the uterine cervix prior to labor induction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002; 3: 254–7.Google Scholar
Verhoeven, CJM, Opmeer, BC, Oei, SG, et al. Transvaginal sonographic assessment of cervical length and wedging for predicting the outcome of labor induction at term: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013; 42: 500–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krammer, J, O’Brien, WF. Mechanical methods of cervical ripening. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1995; 38: 280–6.Google Scholar
Woodman, WB Induction of labor at eight month, and delivery of a living child in less than four hours by Dr. Barnes’s method. Lancet 1863; i: 10.Google Scholar
Vengalil, SR, Guinn, DA, Olabi, NF, et al. A randomized trial of misoprostol and extra-amniotic saline infusion for cervical ripening and labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91: 774–9.Google Scholar
Sherman, DJ, Frenkel, E, Pansky, M, et al. Balloon cervical ripening with extra-amniotic infusion of saline or prostaglandin E2: a double-blind, randomized controlled study. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97: 375–80.Google Scholar
Lin, A, Kupferminc, M, Dooley, SL. A randomized trial of extraamniotic saline infusion versus laminaria for cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86: 545–9.Google Scholar
Sherman, DJ, Frenkel, E, Tovbin, J, et al. Ripening of the unfavorable cervix with extra-amniotic catheter balloon: clinical experience and review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1996; 51: 621–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, J, Gillen, G, Sanchez-Ramos, L, Kaunitz, AM. Do mechanical methods of cervical ripening increase infectious morbidity? A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199: 177–87.Google Scholar
Chen, W, Xue, J, Gaudet, L, Walker, M, Wen, SW. Meta-analysis of Foley catheter plus misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for cervical ripening. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2015; 129: 193–8.Google Scholar
Kazzi, GM, Bottoms, SF, Rosen, MG. Efficacy and safety of Laminaria digitata for preinduction ripening of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1982; 60: 440–3.Google Scholar
Gilson, GJ, Russell, DJ, Izquierdo, LA, et al. A prospective randomized evaluation of a hygroscopic cervical dilator, Dilapan, in the preinduction ripening of patients undergoing induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175: 145–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krammer, J, Williams, MC, Sawai, SK, O’Brien, WF. Preinduction cervical ripening: A randomized comparison of two methods. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85: 614–18.Google Scholar
Guinn, DA, Goepfert, AR, Christine, M, et al. Extra-amniotic saline infusion, laminaria, or prostaglandin E2 gel for labor induction with unfavorable cervix: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96: 106–12.Google Scholar
Boulvain, M, Irion, O, Marcoux, S, Fraser, W. Sweeping of the membranes to prevent post-term pregnancy and to induce labour: a systematic review. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 481–5.Google Scholar
Boulvain, M, Stan, CM, Irion, O. Membrane sweeping for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005; (1): CD000451.Google Scholar
Tsuei, JJ, Yiu-Fun, L, Sharma, S. The influence of acupuncture stimulation during pregnancy: the induction and inhibition of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1977; 50: 479–88.Google Scholar
Smith, CA, Crowther, CA, Collins, CT, Coyle, ME. Acupuncture to induce labor. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112: 1067–74.Google Scholar
Smith, CA, Crowther, CA, Grant, SJ. Acupuncture for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; (8): CD002962.Google Scholar
Macer, J, Buchanan, D, Yonekura, ML. Induction of labor with prostaglandin E2 vaginal suppositories. Obstet Gynecol 1984; 63: 664–8.Google Scholar
Gordon-Wright, AP, Elder, MG. Prostaglandin E2 tablets used intravaginally for the induction of labor. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1979; 86: 32–6.Google Scholar
Craft, I. Amniotomy and oral prostaglandin E2 titration for induction of labor. BMJ 1972; 2: 191–4.Google Scholar
Uldbjerg, N, Ekman, G, Malmstrom, A, et al. Biochemical and morphological changes of human cervix after local application of prostaglandins. Lancet 1981; 1: 267–8.Google Scholar
Rath, W, Adelman-Girill, BC, Pieper, U, Kuhn, W. The role of collagenases and proteases in prostaglandin induced cervical ripening. Prostaglandins 1987; 34: 119–27.Google Scholar
Keirse, MJ. Prostaglandins in preinduction cervical ripening. Meta-analysis of worldwide clinical experience. J Reprod Med 1993; 38: 89–100.Google Scholar
Owen, J, Winkler, CL, Harris, BA, et al. A randomized, doubleblind trial of prostaglandin E2 gel for cervical ripening and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 165: 991–6.Google Scholar
Vollebregt, A, van’t Hof, DB, Exalto, N. Prepidil compared to Propess for cervical ripening. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002; 104: 116–19.Google Scholar
Stewart, JD, Rayburn, WF, Farmer, KC, et al. Effectiveness of prostaglandin E2 intracervical gel (Prepidil), with immediate oxytocin, versus vaginal insert (Cervidil) for induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179: 1175–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hennessey, MH, Rayburn, WF, Stewart, JD, Liles, EC. Preeclampsia and induction of labor: a randomized comparison of prostaglandin E2 as an intracervical gel, with oxytocin immediately, or as a sustained-release vaginal insert. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179: 1204–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanchez-Ramos, L, Kaunitz, AM, Del Valle, GO, et al. Labor induction with the prostaglandin E1 methyl analogue misoprostol versus oxytocin: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81: 332–6.Google Scholar
Fletcher, HM, Mitchell, S, Simeon, D, et al. Intravaginal misoprostol as a cervical ripening agent. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993; 100: 641–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fletcher, H, Mitchell, S, Simeon, D, et al. Intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone as cervical ripening and labor-inducing agents. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 83: 244–7.Google Scholar
Campos, GA, Guzman, S, Rodriguez, JG, et al. Misoprostol-Un analogo de la PGE1-para la induccion de parto a termino: estudio comparativo y randomizado con oxitocina. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 1994; 59: 190–6.Google Scholar
Tabor, B, Anderson, J, Stettler, B, Wetwiska, T Misoprostol versus prostaglandin E2 gel for cervical ripening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172: 425 (Abstract no. 605).Google Scholar
Wing, DA, Jones, MM, Rahall, A, et al. A comparison of misoprostol and prostaglandin E2 gel for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172: 1804–10.Google Scholar
Wing, DA, Rahall, A, Jones, MM, et al. Misoprostol: an effective agent for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172: 1811–16.Google Scholar
Varaklis, K, Gumina, R, Stubblefield, PG. Randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol and intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 86: 541–4.Google Scholar
Chuck, FJ, Huffaker, BJ. Labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel (Prepidil Gel): randomized comparison. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 1137–42.Google Scholar
Echeverria, E, Rocha, M. Estudio comparativo randomizado de induccion de parto con ocitocina y misoprostol en embarazos en vias de prolongacion. Rev Chil Obstet Ginecol 1995; 60: 108–11.Google Scholar
Ngai, SW, To, WK, Lao, T, Ho, PC. Cervical priming with oral misoprostol in prelabor rupture of membranes at term. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 87: 923–6.Google Scholar
Mundle, WR, Young, DC. Vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88: 521–5.Google Scholar
Kadanali, S, Kucukozkan, T, Zor, N, Kumtepe, Y. Comparison of labor induction with misoprostol vs. oxytocin/prostaglandin E2 in term pregnancy. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1996; 55: 99–104.Google Scholar
Rust, OA, Greybush, M, Singleton, C, et al. A comparison of preinduction cervical ripening techniques. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: S126.Google Scholar
Kolderup, L, McLean, L, Grullon, K, et al. Misoprostol is more efficacious for labor induction than prostaglandin F2, but is it associated with more risk? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1543–50.Google Scholar
Danielian, P, Porter, B, Ferri, N, et al. Misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a more effective agent than dinoprostone vaginal gel. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 793–7.Google Scholar
Nunes, F, Rodrigues, R, Meirinho, M. Randomized comparison between intravaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181: 626–9.Google Scholar
Abramovici, D, Goldwasser, S, Mabie, BC, et al. A randomized comparison of oral misoprostol versus Foley catheter and oxytocin for induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 181: 1108–12.Google Scholar
Butt, KD, Bennett, KA, Crane, JMG, et al. Randomized comparison of oral misoprostol and oxytocin for labor induction in term prelabor membrane rupture. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94: 994–9.Google Scholar
Sennstrom, MB, Ekman, G, Westergren-Thorsson, G, et al. Human cervical ripening and inflammatory process mediated by cytokines. Mol Hum Reprod 2000; 6: 375–381.Google Scholar
Sennstrom, MK, Brauner, A, Lu, Y, et al. Interleukin-8 is a mediator of the final cervical ripening in humans. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1997; 74: 89–92.Google Scholar
Vaisanen-Tommiska, M, Nuutila, M, Aittomaki, K, et al. Nitric oxide metabolites in cervical fluid during pregnancy: further evidence for the role of cervical nitric oxide in cervical ripening. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188: 779–85.Google Scholar
Ekerhovd, E, Weijdegard, B, Brannstrom, M, et al. Nitric oxide induced cervical ripening in the human: involvement of cyclic guanosine monophosphate, prostaglandin F(2 alpha), and prostaglandin E2. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 745–50.Google Scholar
Maul, H, Longo, M, Saade, GR, Garfield, RE. Nitric oxide and its role during pregnancy: from ovulation to delivery. Curr Pharm Des 2003; 9: 359–80.Google Scholar
Bao, S, Rai, J, Screiber, J. Brain nitric oxide synthase expression is enhanced in the human cervix in labor. J Soc Gynecol Investig 2001; 8: 158–64.Google Scholar
Nicoll, AE, Mackenzie, F, Greer, IA, Norman, JE. Vaginal application of the nitric oxide donor isosorbide mononitrate for preinduction cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial to determine effects on maternal and fetal hemodynamics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 184: 958–64.Google Scholar
Chanrachakul, B, Herabutya, Y, Punyavachira, P. Potential efficacy of nitric oxide for cervical ripening in pregnancy at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2000; 71: 217–19.Google Scholar
Riskin-Mashiah, S, Wilkins, I. Cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 1999; 26: 243–57.Google Scholar
Brennand, JE, Calder, AA, Leitch, CR, et al. Recombinant human relaxin as a cervical ripening agent. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104: 775–80.Google Scholar
Dawood, MY, Ylikorkala, O, Trivedi, D, Fuchs, F. Oxytocin in maternal circulation and amniotic fluid during pregnancy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1979; 49: 429–34.Google Scholar
Seitchik, J, Amico, J, Robinson, AG, Castillo, M. Oxytocin augmentation of dysfunctional labor. IV. Oxytocin pharmacokinetics. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 150: 225–8.Google Scholar
Leake, RD, Weitzman, RE, Fisher, DA. Pharmacokinetics of oxytocin in the human subject. Obstet Gynecol 1980; 56: 701–4.Google Scholar
Seitchik, J The management of functional dystocia in the first stage of labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1987; 30: 42–9.Google Scholar
Caldeyro-Barcia, R, Sereno, JA. The response of the human uterus to oxytocin throughout pregnancy. In Caldeyro-Barcia, R, Heller, H (eds), Oxytocin. New York, NY: Pergamon Press, 1961, pp. 177–200.Google Scholar
Fuchs, A, Fuchs, F, Husslein, P, et al. Oxytocin receptors in the human uterus during pregnancy and parturition. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 150: 734–41.Google Scholar
Fuchs, A, Fuchs, F, Husslein, P, et al. Oxytocin receptors and human parturition: a dual role for oxytocin in the initiation of labor. Science 1982; 215: 1396–8.Google Scholar
Husslein, P, Fuchs, A, Fuchs, F. Oxytocin and the initiation of human parturition. I. Prostaglandin release during induction of labor by oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981; 141: 688–93.Google Scholar
Tomasi, A, Bangalore, S, Phillippe, M Myometrial contractile and inositol-phosphate response to oxytocin. Abstract 357, Society for Gynecologic Investigation, 34th Annual Meeting, Atlanta, 1987.Google Scholar
Hendricks, CH, Brenner, WE. Cardiovascular effects of oxytocic drugs used post partum. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1970; 108: 751–760.Google Scholar
Feeney, JG. Water intoxication and oxytocin. Br Med J 1982; 285: 243.Google Scholar
Lilien, AA. Oxytocin-induced water intoxication: a report of a maternal death. Obstet Gynecol 1968; 32: 171–3.Google Scholar
Blakemore, KJ, Qin, NG, Petrie, RH, Paine, LL. A prospective comparison of hourly and quarter-hourly oxytocin dose increase intervals for the induction of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol 1990; 75: 757–61.Google Scholar
Mercer, B, Pilgrim, P, Sibai, B. Labor induction with continuous low-dose oxytocin infusion: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 1991; 77: 659–63.Google Scholar
Chua, S, Arulkumaran, S, Kurup, A, et al. Oxytocin titration for induction of labour: a prospective randomized study of 15 versus 30 minute dose increment schedules. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1991; 31: 134–7.Google Scholar
Satin, AJ, Leveno, KJ, Sherman, ML, Mclntire, D. High-dose oxytocin: 20-versus 40-minute dosage interval. Obstet Gynecol 1994; 83: 234–8.Google Scholar
Muller, PR, Stubbs, TM, Laurent, SL. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing two oxytocin induction protocols. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167: 373–81.Google Scholar
Merrill, DC, Zlatnik, FJ. Randomized, double-masked comparison of oxytocin dosage in induction and augmentation of labor. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94: 455–63.Google Scholar
Crane, JM, Young, DC. Meta-analysis of low-dose versus high-dose oxytocin for labour induction. J Soc Obstet Gynaecol Can 1998; 20: 1215–23.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction and Augmentation of Labor. ACOG Technical Bulletin No. 110. Washington, DC, ACOG, 1987.Google Scholar
Cummiskey, KC, Dawood, MY. Induction of labor with pulsatile oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990; 163: 1868–74.Google Scholar
Salamalekis, E, Vitoratos, N, Kassanos, D, et al. A randomized trial of pulsatile vs. continuous oxytocin infusion for labor induction. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 2000; 27: 21–3.Google Scholar
Reid, GJ, Helewa, ME. A trial of pulsatile versus continuous oxytocin administration for the induction of labor. J Perinatol 1995; 15: 364–6.Google Scholar
Willcourt, RJ, Pager, D, Wendel, J, Hale, RW. Induction of labor with pulsatile oxytocin by a computer-controlled pump. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170: 603–8.Google Scholar
Schrinsky, DC, Benson, RC. Rupture of the pregnant uterus: a review. Obstet Gynecol Surv 1978; 33: 217–32.Google Scholar
Eden, RD, Parker, RT, Gall, SA. Rupture of the pregnant uterus: a 53-year review. Obstet Gynecol 1986; 68: 671–4.Google Scholar
Johnson, JD, Aldrich, M, Angelus, P, et al. Oxytocin and neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: studies of bilirubin production. Am J Dis Child 1984; 138: 1047–50.Google Scholar
Linn, S, Schoenbaum, SC, Monson, RR, et al. Epidemiology of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia. Pediatrics 1985; 75: 770–4.Google Scholar
Ulmsten, U, Ekman, G, Belfrage, P, et al. Intracervical versus intravaginal PGE2 for induction of labor at term patients with an unfavorable cervix. Arch Gynecol 1985; 236: 243–8.Google Scholar
Darroca, RJ, Buttino, L, Miller, J, Khamis, HJ. Prostaglandin E2 gel for cervical ripening in patients with an indication for delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 87: 228–30.Google Scholar
Rayburn, WF, Wapner, RJ, Barss, VA. An intravaginal controlled-release prostaglandin E2 pessary for cervical ripening and induction of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 79: 374–9.Google Scholar
Sanchez-Ramos, L, Farah, LA, Kaunitz, AM, et al. Preinduction cervical ripening with commercially available prostaglandin E2 gel: a randomized, double-blind comparison with a hospital-compounded preparation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 1079–84.Google Scholar
Stempel, JE, Prins, RP, Dean, S. Preinduction cervical ripening: a randomized prospective comparison of the efficacy and safety of intravaginal and intracervical prostaglandin E2 gel. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 176: 1305–9.Google Scholar
Rabe, T, Basse, H, Thuro, H, et al. Effect of PGE1 methyl analog misoprostol on the pregnant uterus in the first trimester. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 1987; 47: 324–31.Google Scholar
Normal, JE, Thong, KJ, Baird, DT. Uterine contractility and induction of abortion in early pregnancy by misoprostol and mifepristone. Lancet 1991; 338: 1233–6.Google Scholar
Jain, JK, Mishell, DR. A comparison of intravaginal misoprostol with prostaglandin E2 for termination of second-trimester pregnancy. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 290–3.Google Scholar
Bugalho, A, Faundes, A, Jamisse, L, et al. Evaluation of the effectiveness of vaginal misoprostol to induce first trimester abortion. Contraception 1996; 53: 244–6.Google Scholar
Koopersmith, TB, Mishell, DR. The use of misoprostol for termination of early pregnancy. Contraception 1996; 53: 238–42.Google Scholar
Wiebe, ER. Abortion induced with methotrexate and misoprostol. Can Med Assoc J 1996; 154: 165–70.Google Scholar
Creinin, MD, Vittinghoff, E, Galbraith, S, Klaisle, C. A randomized trial comparing misoprostol three and seven days after methotrexate for early abortion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 1578–84.Google Scholar
Baird, DT, Sukcharoen, N, Thong, KJ. Randomized trial of misoprostol and cervagem in combination with a reduced dose of mifepristone for induction of abortion. Hum Reprod 1995; 10: 1521–7.Google Scholar
Lemancewicz, A, Urban, R, Skotnicki, MZ, et al. Uterine and fetal Doppler flow changes after misoprostol and oxytocin therapy for induction of labor in post-term pregnancies. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1999; 67: 139–45.Google Scholar
Thomas, N, Longo, SA, Rumney, PJ, et al. Intravaginal misoprostol in prelabor rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: S136.Google Scholar
Ngai, SW, Chan, YM, Lam, SW, Lao, TT. Labour characteristics and uterine activity: misoprostol compared with oxytocin in women at term with prelabor rupture of membranes. BJOG 2000; 107: 222–7.Google Scholar
Bennett, KA, Butt, K, Crane, JMG, et al. A masked randomized comparison of oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol for labor induction. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92: 481–6.Google Scholar
Adir, CD, Weeks, JW, Barrilleaux, S, et al. Oral or vaginal misoprostol administration for induction of labor: a randomized, double-blind trial. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 92: 810–13.Google Scholar
Wing, DA, Ham, D, Paul, RH. A comparison of orally administered misoprostol with vaginally administered misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1155–60.Google Scholar
Kwon, JS, Mackenzie, VP, Davies, GAL. A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: S128.Google Scholar
Wing, DA, Park, MR, Paul, RH. Oral administration of 100 microgram tablets of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95: 905–8.Google Scholar
Dyar, TR, Greig, P, Cummings, R, Nichols, K. The efficacy and safety of oral versus vaginal misoprostol for the induction of term labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: S135.Google Scholar
Sanchez-Ramos, L, Kaunitz, AM, Wears, RL, et al. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 89: 633–42.Google Scholar
Sanchez-Ramos, L, Kaunitz, AM. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000; 43: 475–88.Google Scholar
Liu, A, Lv, J, Hu, Y, et al. Efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for labor induction at term: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2014; 40: 897–906.Google Scholar
Khan, RU, El-Refaey, H. Pharmacokinetics and adverse-effect profile of rectally administered misoprostol in the third stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101: 968–74.Google Scholar
Tang, OS, Schweer, H, Seyberth, HW, et al. Pharmacokinetics of different routes of administration of misoprostol. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 332–6.Google Scholar
Gemzell Danielsson, K, Marions, L, Rodriguez, A, et al. Comparison between oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol on uterine contractility. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 275–80.Google Scholar
Zieman, M, Fong, SK, Benowitz, NL, et al. Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 88–92.Google Scholar
Alfirevic, Z, Aflaifel, N, Weeks, A. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (6): CD001338.Google Scholar
Farah, LA, Sanchez-Ramos, L, Rosa, C, et al. Randomized trial of two doses of the prostaglandin E1 analog misoprostol for labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997; 177: 364–71.Google Scholar
Srisomboon, J, Singchai, S. A comparison between 25 micrograms and 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for labor induction. J Med Assoc Thai 1998; 81: 779–84.Google Scholar
Diro, M, Adra, A, Gilles, JM, et al. A double-blind randomized trial of two dose regimens of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. J Matern Fetal Med 1999; 8: 114–18.Google Scholar
Wang, H, Li, L, Pu, L. The effect of 25 μg misoprostol on induction of labor in late pregnancy. Chin J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 33: 469–71.Google Scholar
El-Sherbiny, MT, El-Gharieb, IH, Gewely, HA. Vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor: 25 μg vs. 50 μg dose regimen. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2001; 72: 25–30.Google Scholar
Meydanli, MM, Caliskan, E, Burak, F, et al. Labor induction postterm with 25 micrograms vs. 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003; 81: 249–55.Google Scholar
McMaster, K, Sanchez-Ramos, L, Kaunitz, AM. Balancing the efficacy and safety of misoprostol: a meta-analysis comparing 25 versus 50 micrograms on intravaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour. BJOG 2015; 122: 468–76.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of Labor with Misoprostol. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 228. Washington, DC: ACOG, 1999.Google Scholar
Kundodyiwa, TW, Alfirevic, Z, Weeks, AD. Low-dose oral misoprostol for induction of labor: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 113: 374–83.Google Scholar
Grobam, WA, Gilbert, S, Landon, MB, et al. Outcomes of induction of labor after one prior cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109: 262–9.Google Scholar
Vause, S, Macintosh, M. Use of prostaglandins to induce labour in women with a cesarean section scar. BMJ 1999; 318: 1056–8.Google Scholar
Sciscione, AC, Nguyen, L, Manley, JS, et al. Uterine rupture during preinduction cervical ripening with misoprostol in a patient with previous cesarean delivery. Aust NZ Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 38: 96–7.Google Scholar
Wing, DA, Lovett, K, Paul, RH. Disruption of prior uterine incision following misoprostol for labor induction in women with previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1998; 91: 828–30.Google Scholar
Blanchette, H, Nayak, S, Erasmus, S. Comparison of the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) with those of dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2) for cervical ripening and induction of labor in a community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1551–9.Google Scholar
Plaut, MM, Schwartz, ML, Lubarsky, SL. Uterine rupture associated with the use of misoprostol in the gravid patient with a previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1535–42.Google Scholar
Cunha, M, Bugalho, A, Bique, C, Bergstrom, S. Induction of labor by vaginal misoprostol in patients with previous cesarean delivery. Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand 1999; 78: 653–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Choy-Hee, I, Raynor, BD. Misoprostol induction in women with prior cesarean. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: S159.Google Scholar
Bennett, KA, Elmore, L, Fleischman, S, et al. Prostaglandin induction in women with prior cesarean delivery increases induction time and risk of uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: S130.Google Scholar
Pocock, SJ. When to stop a clinical trial. BMJ 1992; 305: 235–40.Google Scholar
Perry, KG, Larmon, JE, May, WL, et al. Cervical ripening: a randomized comparison between intravaginal misoprostol and an intracervical balloon catheter combined with intravaginal dinoprostone. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 178: 1333–40.Google Scholar
Carlan, SJ, Bouldin, S, O’Brien, WF. Extemporaneous preparation of misoprostol gel for cervical ripening: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 911–15.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 342: induction of labor for vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108: 465–8.Google Scholar
Dodd, JM, Crowther, CA, Haslam, RR, Robinson, JS. Elective birth at 37 weeks of gestation versus standard care for women with an uncomplicated twin pregnancy at term: the Twins Timing of Birth Randomised Trial. BJOG 2012; 119: 964–73.Google Scholar
Fausett, MB, Barth, WH, Yoder, BA, Satin, AJ. Oxytocin labor stimulation of twin gestations: effective and efficient. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 202–4.Google Scholar
Manor, M, Blickstein, I, Ben-Arie, A, et al. Case series of labor induction in twin gestations with an intrauterine balloon catheter. Gynecol Obstet Invest 1999; 47: 244–6.Google Scholar
Suzuki, S, Otsubo, Y, Sawa, R, et al. Clinical trial of induction of labor versus expectant management in twin pregnancy. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2000; 49: 24–7.Google Scholar
Neimand, KM, Gibstein, A, Rosenthal, AH. Oxytocin in twin gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1967; 99: 533–8.Google Scholar
Wolfe, MD, de la Torre, L, Moore, LE, Myers, O, Rayburn, WF. Is the protocol for induction of labor in singletons applicable to twin gestations? J Reprod Med 2013; 58: 137–42.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of Labor. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 10. Washington, DC: ACOG, 1999.Google Scholar
Toaff, R, Ayalon, D, Gogol, G. Clinical use of high concentration oxytocin drip. Obstet Gynecol 1971; 37: 112–20.Google Scholar
Kent, DR, Goldstein, AI, Linzey, EM. Safety and efficacy of vaginal prostaglandin E2 suppositories in the management of third-trimester fetal demise. J Reprod Med 1984; 29: 101–2.Google Scholar
Mariani-Neto, C, Leao, EJ, Barreto, EM, et al. Use of misoprostol for labor induction in stillbirth. Rev Paul Med 1987; 105: 325–8.Google Scholar
Bugalho, A, Bique, C, Machungo, F, Bergstrom, S. Vaginal misoprostol as an alternative to oxytocin for induction of labor in women with late fetal death. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1995; 74: 194–8.Google Scholar
Nakintu, N A comparative study of vaginal misoprostol and intravenous oxytocin for induction of labour in women with intrauterine fetal death in Mulago Hospital, Uganda. Afr Health Sci 2001; 1: 55–9.Google Scholar
Dodd, JM, Crowther, CA. Misoprostol for induction of labour to terminate pregnancy in the second or third trimester for women with a fetal anomaly or after intrauterine fetal death. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; (4): CD004901.Google Scholar
Mother-of-two dies after doctors give her 16 times correct dose of labour-inducing drug. Mail Online June 3, 2011. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1393945/Misoprostol-Mother-dies-doctors-16-times-correct-dose-labour-inducing-drug.html (accessed March 2017).Google Scholar
Gómez Ponce de León, R, Wing, D, Fiala, C. Misoprostol for intrauterine fetal death. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007; 99 (Suppl 2): S190–3.Google Scholar
Wagaarachchi, PT, Ashok, PW, Narvekar, NN, Smith, NC, Templeton, A. Medical management of late intrauterine death using a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol. BJOG 2002; 109: 443–7.Google Scholar
Mahomed, K, Jayaguru, AS. Extra-amniotic saline infusion for induction of labour in antepartum fetal death: a cost effective method worthy of wider use. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997; 104: 1058–61.Google Scholar
Jatlaoui, TC, Ewing, A, Mandel, MG, et al. Abortion surveillance: United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ 2016; 65 (12):1–44. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/ss/ss6512a1.htm (accessed March 2017).Google Scholar
Hammond, C, Chasen, S. Dilation and evacuation. In Paul, M, Lichtenberg, ES, Borgatta, L, et al. (eds), Management of Unintended and Abnormal Pregnancy: Comprehensive Abortion Care. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, pp. 157–77.Google Scholar
Hammond, C, Steinauer, J, Falk, SJ Second trimester pregnancy termination. UpToDate 2015. http://www.uptodate.com/contents/overview-of-second-trimester-pregnancy-termination (accessed March 2017).Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Second-trimester abortion. Practice Bulletin No. 135. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 121: 1394–406.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The Care of Women Requesting Induced Abortion. Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline No. 7. London: RCOG, 2011. https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/abortion-guideline_web_1.pdf (accessed March 2017).Google Scholar
Ngai, SW, Tang, OS, Ho, PC. Prostaglandins for induction of second-trimester termination and intrauterine death. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 17: 765–75.Google Scholar
Kapp, N, von Hertzen, H. Medical methods to induce abortion in the second trimester. In Paul, M, Lichtenberg, ES, Borgatta, L, et al. (eds), Management of Unintended and Abnormal Pregnancy: Comprehensive Abortion Care. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, pp. 178–92.Google Scholar
Lohr, PA, Hayes, JL, Gemzell-Danielsson, K. Surgical versus medical methods for second trimester induced abortion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; (1): CD006714.Google Scholar
Bryant, AG, Grimes, DA, Garrett, JM, Stuart, GS. Second trimester abortion for fetal anomalies or fetal death: labor induction compared with dilation and evacuation. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117: 788–92.Google Scholar
Autry, AM, Hayes, EC, Jacobson, GF, Kirby, RS. A comparison of medical induction and dilation and evacuation for second-trimester abortion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 393–7.Google Scholar
Weiss, BM, Zemp, L, Seifert, B, Hess, OM. Outcome of pulmonary vascular disease in pregnancy: a systematic overview from 1978 through 1996. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 31: 1650–7.Google Scholar
Guttmacher Institute. States enact record number of abortion restrictions in first half of 2011. New York, NY: GI, 2011. http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2011/07/13 (accessed March 2017).Google Scholar
Geerinck-Vercammen, CR, Kanhal, HH. Coping with termination of pregnancy for fetal abnormality in a supportive environment. Prenat Diagn 2003; 23: 543–8.Google Scholar
Chervenak, FA, McCullough, LB, Skupski, D, Chasen, ST. Ethical issues in the management of pregnancies complicated by fetal anomalies. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2003; 58: 473–83.Google Scholar
Rezk, MA, Sanad, Z, Dawood, R, Emarh, M, Masood, A. Comparison of intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter alone or in combination for termination of second trimester pregnancy. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2015; 28: 93–6.Google Scholar
Borgatta, L, Stubblefield, PG. The challenging abortion. In Paul, M, Lichtenberg, ES, Borgatta, L, et al. (eds), Management of Unintended and Abnormal Pregnancy: Comprehensive Abortion Care. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009, pp. 193–207.Google Scholar
Darney, PD, Sweet, RL. Routine intraoperative sonography for second trimester abortion reduces incidence of uterine perforation. J Ultrasound Med 1989; 8: 71–5.Google Scholar
Khanna, NM, Sarin, JPS, Nandi, RC, et al. Isaptent: a new cervical dilator. Contraception 1980; 21: 29–40.Google Scholar
Borgatta, L, Chen, AY, Vragovic, O, Stubblefield, PG, Magloire, CA. A randomized clinical trial of the addition of laminaria to misoprostol and hypertonic saline for second-trimester induction abortion. Contraception 2005; 72: 358–61.Google Scholar
Stroh, G, Hinman, AR. Reported live births following induced abortion: two and one-half years’ experience in upstate New York. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1976; 126: 83–90.Google Scholar
Jain, JK, Mishell, DR. A comparison of misoprostol with and without laminaria tents for induction of second-trimester abortion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175: 173–7.Google Scholar
Ho, PC, Tsang, SSK, Ma, HK. Reducing the induction to abortion interval in termination of second trimester pregnancies: a comparison of mifepristone with laminaria tent. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1995; 102: 648–51.Google Scholar
WHO Scientific Group on Medical Methods for Termination of Pregnancy. Method of abortion after 14 weeks of gestation. WHO Technical Report Series on medical method for termination of pregnancy. Geneva: WHO, 1997, pp. 42–54.Google Scholar
Nuutila, M, Toivonen, J, Ylikorkala, O, Halmesmäki, E. A comparison between two doses of intravaginal misoprostol and gemeprost for induction of second-trimester abortion. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 896–900.Google Scholar
Herabutya, Y, O-Prasertsawat, P. Second trimester abortion using intravaginal misoprostol. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1998; 60: 161–5.Google Scholar
Jain, JK, Kuo, J, Mishell, DR. A comparison of two dosing regimens of intravaginal misoprostol for second-trimester pregnancy termination. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 571–5.Google Scholar
Wong, KS, Ngai, CSW, Yeo, ELK. A comparison of two regimens of intravaginal misoprostol for termination of second trimester pregnancy: a randomized comparative trial. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 709–12.Google Scholar
Dickinson, JE, Evans, SF. The optimization of intravaginal misoprostol dosing schedules in second-trimester pregnancy termination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 470–4.Google Scholar
Bebbington, MW, Dent, N, Lim, K, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing two protocols for the use of misoprostol in midtrimester pregnancy termination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 853–7.Google Scholar
Feldman, DM, Borgida, AF, Rodis, JF, et al. A randomized comparison of two regimens of misoprostol for second-trimester pregnancy termination. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 710–13.Google Scholar
Dickinson, JE, Evans, SF. A comparison of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol administration in second-trimester pregnancy termination for fetal abnormality. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 101: 1294–9.Google Scholar
von Hertzen, H, Piaggio, G, Wojdyla, D, et al. Comparison of vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for second trimester abortion: randomized controlled equivalence trial. Hum Reprod 2009; 24: 106–12.Google Scholar
El-Refaey, H, Templeton, A. Induction of abortion in the second trimester by a combination of misoprostol and mifepristone: a randomized comparison between two misoprostol regimens. Hum Reprod 1995; 10: 475–8.Google Scholar
Webster, D, Penny, GC, Templeton, A. A comparison of 600 mg and 200 mg mifepristone prior to second trimester abortion with the prostaglandin misoprostol. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103: 706–9.Google Scholar
Ho, PC, Ngai, SW, Liu, KL. Vaginal misoprostol compared with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 735–8.Google Scholar
Ngai, SW, Tang, OS, Ho, PC. Randomized comparison of vaginal (200 every 3 h) and oral (400 every 3 h) misoprostol when combined with mifepristone in termination of second trimester pregnancy. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 2205–8.Google Scholar
Ashok, PW, Templeton, A. Nonsurgical mid-trimester termination of pregnancy: a review of 500 consecutive cases. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 706–10.Google Scholar
Bartley, J, Baird, DT. A randomized study of misoprostol and gemeprost in combination with mifepristone for induction of abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy. BJOG 2002; 109: 1290–4.Google Scholar
Sutkin, G, Capelle, SD, Schlievert, PM, Creinin, MD. Laminaria cervical dilation might be associated with toxic shock syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 98: 959–61.Google Scholar
Kallra, PA, Litherland, D, Sallomi, DF, et al. Cardiac standstill induced by prostaglandin pessaries. Lancet 1989; i: 1460–1.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×