Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR)

Description of this bibliographical database (AFAR website)
Currently 3059 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://afar.info/id=2817

Created on : 26 Nov 2017
Modified on : 26 Nov 2017

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Hard

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

Labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol compared with the dinoprostone vaginal insert: a systematic review and metaanalysis - American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology - Vol. 202, 6 - p.624.e1-624.e9

Author(s) :

Austin, S.C.; Sanchez-Ramos, L.; Adair, C.D.

Year of publication :

2010

URL(s) :

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.…
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.03.014

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

Objective: The purpose of this study was to review randomized trials that compared the efficacy of the dinoprostone 10-mg controlled-release vaginal insert with that of vaginally administered misoprostol tablets in cervical ripening and labor induction. Study Design: Electronic databases were used to identify randomized clinical trials that compared dinoprostone with misoprostol. Estimates of the relative risk for individual studies and risk difference from dichotomous outcomes with the use of random and fixed-effects models were calculated. Results: Women who received misoprostol had a higher incidence of vaginal delivery within 12 and 24 hours of prostaglandin application, compared with dinoprostone. Both modalities had similar incidences of cesarean delivery, uterine hyperstimulation, and fetal tachysystole. There was an increased need for oxytocin augmentation in the dinoprostone group. No significant difference in neonatal outcomes was noted between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Vaginally administered misoprostol was more effective than the dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening and labor induction. The safety profiles of both drugs were similar. © 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Sumário (português)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Keywords :

➡ induction of labor ; misoprostol (Cytotec)

Author of this record :

Import 26/11/2017 — 26 Nov 2017

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms (read guidelines)

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database is managed by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR, https://afar.info)
affiliated with 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 AFAR (see below)
(3) or joining the AFAR (or another society affiliated with CIANE).
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact afar.association(arobase)gmail.com for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to AFAR (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