Transactions of The Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine| Volume 187, ISSUE 4, P853-857, October 2002

Download started.


A randomized controlled trial comparing two protocols for the use of misoprostol in midtrimester pregnancy termination


      Objective: Our purpose was to compare the efficacy of oral misoprostol with that of vaginal misoprostol for midtrimester termination of pregnancy. Study Design: Women seen for midtrimester pregnancy termination were randomly assigned to receive either misoprostol orally in a dose of 200 μg every hour for 3 hours followed by 400 μg every 4 hours or vaginally in a dose of 400 μg every 4 hours. The protocol was followed for 24 hours, after which time further management was at the discretion of the attending physician. The primary outcome measure was the induction-to-delivery interval. Sample size was calculated a priori. Statistical analysis was performed with the t test for continuous variables and the χ2 test for categorical variables. P <.05 was considered significant. Results: One hundred fourteen women were randomized, with 49 receiving vaginal misoprostol and 65 receiving oral misoprostol. The two groups were comparable with respect to maternal age, parity, indication for pregnancy termination, gestational age, and maternal weight. The mean induction-to-delivery interval was significantly shorter for the vaginal group (19.6 ± 17.5 hours vs 34.5 ± 28.2 hours, P <.01). Length of stay was also shorter in the vaginal group (32.3 ± 17.3 hours vs 50.9 ± 27.9 hours, P <.01). Significantly more patients in the vaginal group were delivered within 24 hours (85.1% vs 39.5%, P <.01), and more patients in the oral group required changes in the method of induction when they were undelivered after 24 hours (38.2% vs 7%, P <.01). The only complication was an increase in febrile morbidity in the vaginal group (25% vs 6.7%, P =.046). This did not result in an increased use of antibiotics, and all the fevers resolved post partum without further complications. Conclusions: Vaginal administration of misoprostol resulted in a shorter induction-to-delivery interval. The shorter length of stay should result in improved patient care. (Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002;187:853-7.)


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Zieman M
        • Fong DR
        • Benowitz NL
        • Banskter D
        • Darney PD
        Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90: 88-92
        • Ho P
        • Ngai S
        • Liu K
        • Wong G
        • Lee S.
        Vaginal misoprostol compared with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90: 735-738
        • Gilbert A
        • Reid R.
        A randomized trial of oral versus vaginal administration of misoprostol for the purpose of mid-trimester termination of pregnancy.
        Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001; 41: 407-410
        • Shetty A
        • Danielian P
        • Templeton A.
        A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol tablets in induction of labour at term.
        Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001; 108: 238-243
        • Kwon JS
        • Davies GAL
        • Mackenzie VP
        A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a randomized trial.
        Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001; 108: 169-178
        • Batioglu S
        • Tonguc E
        • Haberal A
        • Celikkanat H
        • Bagis T.
        Midtrimester termination of complicated pregnancy with oral misoprostol.
        Adv Contracept. 1997; 13: 55-61
        • Wong KS
        • Ngai CS
        • Wong AY
        • Tang LC
        • Ho PC
        Vaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal gemeprost in termination of second trimester pregnancy: a randomized trial.
        Contraception. 1998; 58: 207-210
        • Jannet D
        • Aflack N
        • Abonkwa A
        • Carbonne B
        • Marpeau L
        • Milliez J.
        Termination of 2nd and 3rd trimester pregnancies with mifepristone and misoprostol.
        Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1996; 70: 159-163
        • Herabutya Y
        • O-Prasersawat P.
        Second trimester abortion using intravaginal misoprostol.
        Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998; 60: 161-165
        • Nuutila M
        • Toivonen J
        • Ylikorkala O
        • Halmesmaki E.
        A comparison between two doses of intravaginal misoprostol and gemeprost for induction of second-trimester abortion.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90: 896-900
        • Jain JK
        • Kuo J
        • Mishell DR
        A comparison of two dosing regimens of intravaginal misoprostol for second-trimester pregnancy termination.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 93: 571-575
        • Bughalho A
        • Bique C
        • Almeida L
        • Faundes A.
        The effectiveness of intravaginal misoprostol (Cytotec) in inducing abortion after eleven weeks of pregnancy.
        Stud Fam Plann. 1993; 224: 319-323
        • Lydon-Rochelle M
        • Holt VL
        • Easterling TR
        • Martin DP
        Risk of uterine rupture during labour among women with a prior cesarean delivery.
        N Engl J Med. 2001; 345: 3-8
        • Wing DA
        • Lovett K
        • Paul RH
        Disruption of prior uterine incision following misoprostol for labor induction in women with previous cesarean section.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1998; 91: 828-830
        • Hill DA
        • Chez RA
        • Quinlan J
        • Fuentes A
        • La Combe J.
        Uterine rupture and dehiscence associated with intravaginal misoprostol cervical ripening.
        J Reprod Med. 2000; 45: 823-826
        • Chen M
        • Shih JC
        • Chiu WT
        • Hsich FJ
        Separation of cesarean scar during second-trimester intravaginal misoprostol abortion.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 94: 840
        • Berghahn L
        • Christensen D
        • Droste S.
        Uterine rupture during second-trimester abortion associated with misoprostol.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 98: 976-977