Comparison of Vaginal PGE2 (Dinoprostone) and Vaginal Misoprostol for Induction of Labour in Primigravid Term Pregnancy
NCT07559812 · Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 240
Last updated 2026-04-30
Summary
This randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare vaginal misoprostol and vaginal PGE2 (dinoprostone) for induction of labour in primigravid women with term pregnancy. Labour induction is commonly required when pregnancy reaches term but spontaneous labour has not started. Different medicines are used to soften the cervix and start uterine contractions, but their effectiveness may vary. A total of 240 primigravid women with singleton pregnancy at 40 weeks or more of gestation, who were not in spontaneous labour and were planned for induction of labour, were included. Participants were allocated into two equal groups. Women in Group M received a 50 μg vaginal misoprostol insert, while women in Group D received a 3 mg vaginal dinoprostone insert. Both medicines were given under aseptic conditions in the inpatient obstetrics setting. The main purpose of the study was to compare the proportion of women who achieved successful vaginal delivery after induction. The study also assessed the time interval from first treatment to vaginal delivery among successful cases. Additional maternal and neonatal outcomes included peripartum hemorrhage, premature rupture of membranes, and admission of the newborn to the neonatal intensive care unit within 48 hours after delivery.
Conditions
- Labor, Induced
- Term Pregnancy
- Cervical Ripening
Interventions
- DRUG
-
50 μg misoprostol was administered as a vaginal insert for induction of labour in primigravid women with term pregnancy.
- DRUG
-
Dinoprostone 3 mg
3 mg dinoprostone was administered as a vaginal insert for induction of labour in primigravid women with term pregnancy.
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Mayo Hospital Lahore
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Saher Anam · Mayo Hospital Lahore
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Max Age
- 45 Years
- Sex
- FEMALE
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2025-10-29
- Primary Completion
- 2026-04-29
- Completion
- 2026-04-29
Countries
- Pakistan
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Low-dose Vaginal Misoprostol Versus Vaginal Dinoprostone Insert for Induction of Labor
NCT03744364 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Efficacy and Safety of Oral Misoprostol 25 μg vs. Vaginal Dinoprostone in Induction of Labor at Term
NCT04955847 ·Status: UNKNOWN
-
Misoprostol Labour Induction Study
NCT03489928 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Titrated Oral Misoprostol Compared to Vaginal Dinoprostone for Induction of Labor
NCT02036437 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Labour Induction With Misoprostol, Dinoprostone and Bard Catheter
NCT00602095 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Comparison of Misoprostol and PGE2 Gel for Induction of Labour in Women With Premature Rupture of Membranes at Term
NCT00355966 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
TheEffect of pH on Misoprostol in Induction of Labor
NCT03829592 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Misoprostol for the Prevention of Postpartum Hemorrhage in Rural Pakistan
NCT00120237 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Misoprostol for Treatment of Postpartum Haemorrhage (PPH) in Home Births
NCT01508429 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Treatment of Postpartum Haemorrhage (PPH) Using Misoprostol in Home Births
NCT01485562 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Efficacy and Safety of Hourly Titrated Misoprostol Versus Vaginal Dinoprostone and Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction
NCT02902653 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Safety and Efficacy Study of Vaginal Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labor
NCT01428037 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Dinoprostone Versus Vaginal Misoprostol for Induction of Labour
NCT06560515 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparing the Effect of Vaginal Misoprostol With Dinoprostone in Term Pregnancies
NCT00432588 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE1/PHASE2
-
A Randomized Trial of Oral Misoprostol Alone Versus Oral Misoprostol Followed by Oxytocin for Labour Induction
NCT03749902 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Failure of Vaginal Delivery After Induction
NCT02758340 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Trial Of Misoprostol And Dinoprostone Vaginal Pessaries for Cervical Priming (TROMAD Study)
NCT00299754 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Simultaneous Mifepristone and Misoprostol Versus Misoprostol Alone for Induction of Labor of Nonviable Second Trimester Pregnancy: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT05322252 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Effect of Misoprostol in Reducing Post Partum Hemorrhage After Labor Induction by Oxytocin
NCT02983591 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Significance of Misoprostol-induced Cervical Ripening Prior to Hysteroscopy
NCT06726278 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Induction With Misoprostol: Oral Mucosa Versus Vaginal Epithelium (IMPROVE)
NCT02408315 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Efficacy & Safety Study Comparing Misoprostol Vaginal Insert (MVI) Versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert (DVI) for Reducing Time to Vaginal Delivery
NCT01127581 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Efficacy and Safety of Titrated Oral Misoprostol Solution for Labor Induction at Term
NCT01070472 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Letrozole Plus Misoprostol Versus Misoprostol Alone for Treating Women With Missed Miscarriage
NCT07160855 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Oral Versus Vaginal Misoprostol in Missed Abortion in First Trimester of Pregnancy
NCT07526064 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: PHASE1