A comparative study of maternal & neonatal outcome and patient satisfaction with intravaginal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin in patients with premature rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation

Bhaumik Shah, Noopur Nagar, Shashwat S. Nagar

Abstract


Background: Premature rupture of membranes (PROM) occurs in about 10% of patients beyond 36 weeks of gestation. In this situation, labor induction with prostaglandins, has been proved to be beneficial and results in decreased chorioamnionitis, neonatal antibiotic therapy, neonatal intensive care (NICU) admission, and increased maternal satisfaction. Many techniques for induction of labor are available. This prospective randomized comparative study was thus taken up to compare the outcomes of misoprostol versus oxytocin with respect to the maternal and neonatal outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Methods: A prospective randomized study was carried out where 200 women admitted to department of obstetrics & gynecology, Pravara Rural Hospital, PMT, Loni with PROM beyond 36 weeks of gestation were included where 100 each were included in two groups- vaginal misoprostol group & oxytocin infusion group.

Results: Nearly 58% of the cases of PROM were in the age group 21-25 yrs. Vaginal deliveries were 42% in misoprostol group, where as 44% in oxytocin group; whereas LSCS were 7% in misoprostol group and 5% in oxytocin group. Maximum number of cases had APGAR score between 7-10 in both the groups. Patients with misoprostol induction were more satisfied as compared to patients with oxytocin induction.

Conclusions: Labor induction with oxytocin infusion for PROM beyond 36 weeks in an unfavorable cervix is associated with longer duration of the second stage and a higher risk of cesarean delivery for failure to progress in comparison to those with transvaginal misoprostol. Patients with misoprostol induction were more satisfied as compared to patients with oxytocin induction.

Keywords


PROM, Oxytocin, Misoprostol, Patient satisfaction

Full Text:

PDF

References


Windrim R, Bennett K, Mundle W, Young DC. Oral administration of misoprostol for labour induction: a randomised controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:392-7.

Wing DA, Paul RH. Induction of labor with misoprostol for premature rupture of membranes beyond thirty-six weeks’ gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:94-9.

Bennett KA, Butt K, Crane JM, Hutchens D, Young DC. A masked randomized comparison of oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol for labour induction. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92(4 Pt 1):481-6.

Ingemarsson I. Controversies: premature rupture of membranes at term--no advantage of delaying induction > 24 hours. J Perinat Med 1996;24:573-9.

Young DC, Crane JMG, Hutchens D, Bennett KA, Butt KD. Misoprostol use in pregnancy: an update. J Society Obstet Gynaecol Can 1999;21:239-45.

Hofmeyr GJ, Gulmezoglu AM. Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction in late pregnancy (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2001. Oxford: Update Software.

Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Wears RL, Delke I, Gaudier FL. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:633-42.

Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000;43:475-88.

Raut MD, Dora H. PROM- A clinical and bacteriological study. J Obstet Gynaecol India 1988;38:554-62.

Guise JM, Duff P, Christian JS. Management of term patients with premature rupture of membranes and an unfavourable cervix. Am J Perinatol 1992;9:56-60.

Zeteroğlu S, Engin-Ustün Y, Ustün Y, Güvercinçi M, Sahin G, Kamaci M. A prospective randomized study comparing misoprostol and oxytocin for premature rupture of membranes at term. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006;19:283-7.

Johnson JW, Daikoku NH, Niebyl JR, Johnson TR Jr, Khouzami VA, Witter FR. Premature rupture of the membranes and prolonged latency. Obstet Gynecol 1981;57:547-56.