a randomized controlled trial of misoprostol and sulprostone to end pregnancy after fetal death
Clicks: 249
ID: 162984
2009
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Star Article
30.0
/100
249 views
38 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
StarRanked #12 of 45 articles by views in vìsnik nacìonalʹnogo avìacìjnogo unìversitetu
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Objective. To compare effectiveness, side effects, and patients' perception of vaginal misoprostol versus intravenous sulprostone for ending pregnancy after fetal death between 14 and 42 weeks gestation.
Method. Multicenter randomized controlled trial, using block randomization, central allocation, and prior power analysis.
Outcome measures. Induction-delivery interval, gastrointestinal side effects, use of analgesia, pain perception, pyrexia, placental retention, hemorrhage, and women's opinions.
Results. Of 176 women aimed for, 143 were randomized over 7 years, of whom 4 were excluded. There was no difference in delivery within 24 and 36 hours: 91.4% and 97.1% with misoprostol (𝑛=70) versus 85.5% and 92.8% with sulprostone (𝑛=69). There was no difference in either gastrointestinal side effects, as reported by the women and their caregivers, use of analgesia, women's pain perception, blood loss or placental retention. Hyperthermia ≥38°C was more common with misoprostol (24.3%) than with sulprostone (11.6%; difference: +12.7%; 95% CI: +1.2% to +25.3%) and related to the total dose used. Acceptability of both induction methods was similar except for freedom of movement, which was substantially in favor of misoprostol (lack of freedom reported with misoprostol in 34.3% versus 63.8% with sulprostone; difference: −29.5%; 95% CI: −13.6% to −45.4%).
Conclusions. Misoprostol and sulprostone are similarly effective with little difference in side effects except for hyperthermia, related to the dose of misoprostol used, and women's reported lack of mobility with intravenous sulprostone. Effectiveness of both methods increased with gestational age.
| Reference Key |
mensel2009obstetricsa
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Kristin Van Mensel;Filip Claerhout;Patrick Debois;Marc J. N. C. Keirse;Myriam Hanssens |
| Journal | vìsnik nacìonalʹnogo avìacìjnogo unìversitetu |
| Year | 2009 |
| DOI |
10.1155/2009/496320
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.