To assess the efficacy and safety of the dinoprostone vaginal insert compared to repeated prostaglandin administration (including dinoprostone and misoprostol) in women at term.Electronic databases and additional handsearching were used to identify randomized controlled trial (RCT). We included studies reporting data separately for nulliparous and/or multiparous in women with unfavourable cervix (Bishop <5) and intact membranes. The primary efficacy outcome was caesarean section (CS) rate. Primary safety outcome was uterine hyperstimulation requiring immediate delivery.Eighteen RCTs were eligible and seven studies were included (totally 911 patients). The dinoprostone vaginal insert reduces CS rate in nulliparous women of 24\% compared to the other ways of administration (RR = 0.76, 95\% CI = 0.59, 0.98). The risk of oxytocin use is reduced with the use of vaginal insert (RR = 0.64, 95\% CI = 0.42, 0.99). The risk of hyperstimulation is statistically higher in nulliparous women using vaginal insert than the other ways of administration with RR = 2.17, 95\% CI = 1.08,4.33.In nulliparous women with unprepared cervix and intact membranes vaginal insert perform better than repeated vaginal doses since it is associated with more vaginal deliveries and less oxytocin use. Although vaginal insert is associated with more uterine hyperstimulation, it shows a protective effect toward caesarean section.
Pre-induction of labour: comparing dinoprostone vaginal insert to repeated prostaglandin administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis / Facchinetti, Fabio; F., Fontanesi; Giovane, C. D.. - In: THE JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE. - ISSN 1476-7058. - STAMPA. - 25:10(2012), pp. 1965-1969. [10.3109/14767058.2012.668584]
Pre-induction of labour: comparing dinoprostone vaginal insert to repeated prostaglandin administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
FACCHINETTI, Fabio;C. D. Giovane
2012
Abstract
To assess the efficacy and safety of the dinoprostone vaginal insert compared to repeated prostaglandin administration (including dinoprostone and misoprostol) in women at term.Electronic databases and additional handsearching were used to identify randomized controlled trial (RCT). We included studies reporting data separately for nulliparous and/or multiparous in women with unfavourable cervix (Bishop <5) and intact membranes. The primary efficacy outcome was caesarean section (CS) rate. Primary safety outcome was uterine hyperstimulation requiring immediate delivery.Eighteen RCTs were eligible and seven studies were included (totally 911 patients). The dinoprostone vaginal insert reduces CS rate in nulliparous women of 24\% compared to the other ways of administration (RR = 0.76, 95\% CI = 0.59, 0.98). The risk of oxytocin use is reduced with the use of vaginal insert (RR = 0.64, 95\% CI = 0.42, 0.99). The risk of hyperstimulation is statistically higher in nulliparous women using vaginal insert than the other ways of administration with RR = 2.17, 95\% CI = 1.08,4.33.In nulliparous women with unprepared cervix and intact membranes vaginal insert perform better than repeated vaginal doses since it is associated with more vaginal deliveries and less oxytocin use. Although vaginal insert is associated with more uterine hyperstimulation, it shows a protective effect toward caesarean section.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Pre-induction of labour comparing dinoprostone vaginal insert to.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
Versione pubblicata dall'editore
Dimensione
953.4 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
953.4 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris