RESUMO
Our purpose was to compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal tablet for induction of labor at term pregnancies. Two hundred three patients with indications for induction of labor at term were randomly assigned to receive either intravaginal misoprostol or dinoprostone vaginal tablet. Fifty micrograms of misoprostol was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every six hours, with a potential maximum of four doses. 3 milligrams of dinoprostone vaginal tablet was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix every eight hours, with a potential maximum of three doses. Further medication was withheld with the occurrence of spontaneous rupture of membrane, entry into adequate contraction pattern(twenty second sustained with two or more frequent uterine contraction in 10 minutes), nonreassuring FHR tracing, or delivery. Artificial membrane rupture with both study protocol was done at the discretion of the attending physician. After membrane rupture, in the cases of failure of active labor or arrest of dilation, oxytocin was administerated. Among those evaluated, 100 received misoprostol and 102 received dinoprostone. The average interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was shorter in the misoprostol group(784.7 +/- 389.3 min) than in the dinoprostone group(988.3 +/- 369.5 min)(p<0.01). There was no significant difference in change of Bishop score between the two groups. No statistically significant differences were noted between two groups in case of need for oxytocin and oxytocin total dose, but significant difference was noted between two groups in case of indication for oxytocin augmentation. There were no significant differences in the routes of delivery. Intravaginal administration of misoprostol appears to be as effective as dinoprostone vaginal tablet for labor induction at full term pregnancies. Complications associated with prostaglndin administration were not statistically different between the two treatment groups.