Base de datos - (CIANE)

Presentación de esta base de datos documental (Sitio web de CIANE)
Actualmente 3111 registros
➡ Canal de YouTube (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=1652

Creado el : 01 Feb 2006
Alterado em : 02 Dec 2007

➡ Editar este registro
¡Sólo siga este enlace si tiene una contraseña de editor!

Ficha bibliográfica (sin autores) :

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol with those of dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labor. {Canada}. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Jun;180(6 Pt 1):1551-9.

Autores :

Blanchette HA, Nayak S, Erasmus S.

Año de publicación :

1999

URL(s) :

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=…

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

OBJECTIVE: This clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) and compared it with that of dinoprostone (prostaglandin E2) for cervical ripening and induction of labor in a community hospital. STUDY

DESIGN: This study involved a retrospective analysis of 81 patients undergoing cervical ripening and induction of labor with prostaglandin E2 from May 1, 1996, to May 1, 1997. A comparison prospective analysis of 145 patients undergoing the same procedure with prostaglandin E1 from May 1, 1997 to May 1, 1998, was performed.

RESULTS: The mean time to delivery was significantly shorter with misoprostol (19.8 +/- 10.4 hours) than with prostaglandin E2 (31.3 +/- 13.0 hours, P <.001). Delivery within 24 hours of induction was significantly more frequent with misoprostol (71.9% of subjects vs 31.3%, P <.001). There was no difference in the cesarean delivery rate with misoprostol (25.6% vs 22.2%, P <.67). The incidence of uterine hyperstimulation was higher with prostaglandin E2 (7.4% vs 0.7%, P <.007). There were no uterine ruptures with prostaglandin E2. There were 2 uterine ruptures and 1 dehiscence with prostaglandin E1 in 3 patients with previous cesarean deliveries and 1 rupture in a patient without a history of uterine scarring. There was no difference in neonatal outcome, with the exception of a fetal death related to uterine rupture in the misoprostol group.

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with prostaglandin E2, misoprostol is more effective in cervical ripening and induction of labor, is as safe for patients who do not have a history of cesarean birth, may carry a higher incidence of uterine rupture, and should not be used for patients attempting vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery.

Sumário (português)  :

Resumen (español)  :

Comentarios :

Fiche importée de http://www.worldserver.com/turk/birthing/rrvbac2000-4.html avec l’aide de Ken Turkowski, septembre 2005

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Argumento (español):

Palabras claves :

➡ parto vaginal tras cesárea ; cesárea ; inducción del parto ; maduración cervical ; misoprostol (Cytotec) ; nacimiento de un bebé muerto ; exceder el término

Autor de este registro :

Cécile Loup — 01 Feb 2006
➡ última modificación : Bernard Bel — 02 Dec 2007