ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol versus oral dinoprostone for labor induction at term. METHODS: One hundred of patients at term were randomized to receive either 50microgram of misoprostol vaginally every 4 hours or dinoprostone 0.5mg orally every 1 hour for the maximum of six doses. Intravenous infusion of oxytocin was administered under such circumferences as the patient did not go into active labor after maximum dose, SROM was developed without an adequate contraction pattern, or the patient had arrest of dilatation(no change in cervical dilatation for 2 hours). We compared the frequency of oxytocin augmentation, administration to delivery interval, vaginal delivery rate within 12 hours and 24 hours, intrapartum complications, induction failure, mode of delivery, neonatal outcomes, and maternal complications between two groups. RESULTS: The average interval from administration to delivery was shorter in the misoprostol group(739.4+/-372.4min vs 1087.7+/-765.1min, p<0.05), but the interval from administration to vaginal delivery of each group was similar(724.3+/-375.4min vs 800.3+/-697.0min). Regarding the frequency of vaginal delivery within 24 hours, however, misoprostol group was higher than dinoprostone group(88% vs 56%, p<0.001). And oxytocin augmentation of labor occurred less commonly in misoprostol group than in dinoprostone group(20% vs 76%, p<0.05). Any statistically significant difference in intrapartum complications, mode of delivery, and neonatal or maternal adverse outcome was not appeared between these two group. CONCLUSION: Vaginal misoprostol is as effective and safe as oral dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labor at term. In addition, vaginal misoprostol contributes the curtailment of labor induction expenditure due to its moderate price; misoprostol costs 100 won per 50microgram.