Database - (CIANE) | |
Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website) |
https://ciane.net/id=2794 | ➡ Modify this record |
Bibliographical entry (without author) : | Misoprostol for Labour Induction after Previous Caesarean Section - Forever a “no Go“? - Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde - Vol. 75, 11 - p.1140-1147 |
Author(s) : | Rath, W.; Tsikouras, P. |
Year of publication : | 2015 |
URL(s) : | https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.… |
Résumé (français) : |
|
Abstract (English) : | Misoprostol in oral or vaginal form is an established method of labour induction worldwide. Its use after previous caesarean section is associated with a high rate of uterine rupture; according to international guidelines it is therefore contraindicated in this setting. However the evidence base for this recommendation comprises case reports, one randomised trial that was discontinued prematurely, and numerous low quality retrospective data analyses published between 1997 and 2004. New insights into e.g. resorption kinetics, dosage and application intervals, dose dependant uterine hyperstimulation rates, as well as increasing clinical experience with misoprostol have lead to a critical reappraisal of these “historical“ studies. Accordingly the evidence supporting a ban on vaginal and particularly oral misoprostol for labour induction in the context of a scarred uterus is currently insufficient for a convincing guideline recommendation. In view of the clear advantages of misoprostol over prostaglandin E2 (cheaper, more effective) a retrospective review of registry data should be conducted to determine the incidence of uterine rupture following misoprostol and the circumstances in which it occurs. A prospective, randomised trial could then be conducted on the basis of these findings (e.g. oral misoprostol vs. vaginal prostaglandin E2); known risk factors for uterine rupture including the type of uterine scar would need to be taken into account when selecting patients for vaginal delivery. Until new data from well-designed studies are available, misoprostol will continue to be contraindicated in clinical guidelines for use in labour induction after previous caesarean section. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart. |
Sumário (português) : |
|
Resumen (español) : |
|
Comments : | |
Argument (français) : |
|
Argument (English): | |
Argumento (português): |
|
Argumento (español): |
|
Keywords : | |
Author of this record : | Import 26/11/2017 — 26 Nov 2017 |
Discussion (display only in English) | ||
---|---|---|
[Hide guidelines] ➡ Discussion guidelines 1) Comments aim at clarifying the content of the publication or suggesting links for a better comprehension of its topic 2) All comments are public and opinions expressed belong to their authors 3) Avoid casual talk and personal stories 4) Any off-topic comment or containing inappropriate statements will be deleted without notice |
New expert query --- New simple query
Creating new record --- Importing records
User management --- Dump database --- Contact
This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
➡ Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
➡ Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.
Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth |