Misoprostol versus dinoprostone for cervical priming prior to induction oflabour in term pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial.

A prospective randomised controlled trial was performed to compare the effi cacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol to that of intravaginal dinopro stone when used for cervical priming prior to the induction of labour; 126 women were recruited to the study and randomised to receive either intravag inal dinoprostone (n = 63) or misoprostol (n = 63) for cervical priming pri or to induction of labour. The mean time from insertion of the priming agen t to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (9 25.8 versus 1577.6 minutes), the mean duration of the active length of labo ur was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (353.7 versus 496.8 m inutes) and more women in the misoprostol group delivered in less than 12 h ours (92% versus 76.5%). Women in the misoprostol group were less likely to require a repeated dose of prostaglandin for cervical priming and less likely to require oxytocin f or augmentation of labour. There was no difference in the number of women w ho were delivered vaginally or by Caesarean section between the two groups. More women developed hyperstimulation during labour in the misoprostol gro up; however there was no difference between the groups in neonatal outcome in respect to low cord pH or Apgar score at delivery or admission to the ne onatal special care nursery.