Off-label use of misoprostol for labor induction: a nation-wide survey in Switzerland

Off-label use of drugs is frequent in obstetrical practice. No data however are available about nation-wide off-label use in obstetrics regarding frequency and patient information. The objective of our study was to assess the clinical practice of off-label use of misoprostol for labor induction.

Labor induction in preeclampsia: is misoprostol more effective than dinoprostone?

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone for induction of labor (IOL) in patients with preeclampsia according to the WHO criteria. STUDY DESIGN: Ninety-eight patients were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 47 patients received 3 mg dinoprostone suppositories every 6 h (max. 6 mg/24 h) whereas 51 patients in the misoprostol group received either 50 mug misoprostol vaginally every 12 h, or 25 mug every 6 h (max. 100 mug/24 h). Primary outcomes were vaginal delivery within 24 and 48 h, respectively. RESULTS: The probability of delivering within 48 h was more than three-fold higher in the misoprostol than in the dinoprostone group: odds ratio (OR)=3.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24, 10.30, whereas no significant difference was observed within 24 h (P=0.34). No correlation was seen between a ripe cervix prior to IOL and delivery within 24/48 h (P=0.33 and P=1.0, respectively). More cesarean sections were performed in the dinoprostone group due to failed IOL (P=0.0009). No significant differences in adverse maternal outcome were observed between both study groups, whereas more neonates (12 vs. 6) of the dinoprostone group were admitted to the NICU (P=0.068). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that misoprostol may have some advantages compared to dinoprostone, including improved efficacy and lower cost of the drug, even in cases of preeclampsia.

Oral misoprostol for third stage of labor: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether orally administered misoprostol during the third stage of labor is efficient in reducing postpartum blood loss. METHODS: In a double-masked trial, during vaginal delivery women were randomly assigned to receive a single oral dose of misoprostol (600 microg) or placebo in third stage of labor, immediately after cord clamping. The third stage of labor was managed routinely by early cord clamping and controlled cord traction; oxytocin was administered only if blood loss seemed more than usual. Blood loss was estimated by the delivering physician and differences in hematocrit were measured before and after delivery. RESULTS: Mean (+/- standard error of the mean) estimated blood loss (345 +/- 19.5 mL versus 417 +/- 25.9 mL, P = .031) and hematocrit difference (4.5 +/- 0.9% versus 7.9 +/- 1.2%, P = .014) were significantly lower in women who received misoprostol than those who received placebo. Fewer women in the misoprostol group had postpartum hemorrhage (blood loss of at least 500 mL), but that difference was not statistically significant (7% versus 15%, P = .43). Additional oxytocin before or after placental separation was used less often in the misoprostol group (16% versus 38%, P = .047). There were no differences in the length of third stage of labor (8 +/- 0.9 minutes versus 9 +/- 1 minutes, P = .947). There were no differences in pain during third stage of labor, postpartum fever, or diarrhea, but shivering was more frequent in the misoprostol group. CONCLUSION: Oral misoprostol administered in the third stage of labor reduced postpartum blood loss and might be effective in reducing incidence of postpartum hemorrhage.