Safety and efficacy of titrated oral misoprostol solution versus vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor: A single‐center randomized control trial.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of the hourly administration of titrated oral misoprostol solution (OMS) and vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor. Methods: Titrated OMS was administrated hourly for induction of labor, starting with a dose of 20 µg and terminating at a dose of 50 µg. The safety and efficacy of OMS were compared with that of vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor. Results: From June 2016 to October 2019, 2280 (78.3%) and 2115 (72.9%) women who received titrated OMS and vaginal dinoprostone, respectively, had a vaginal delivery (P = 0.005). Cesarean delivery was performed in 632 (21.7%) and 783 (27.0%) women who received titrated OMS and vaginal dinoprostone, respectively (P = 0.008). Tachysystole with changes in fetal heart rate (FHR) was seen in 104 (3.6%) and 249 (8.6%) women in the OMS and dinoprostone groups, respectively (P = 0.007). The frequency of non‐reassuring FHR was lower in the OMS group compared to the dinoprostone group (P = 0.006). Conclusion: The titrated OMS has an efficacy comparable to vaginal dinoprostone. Moreover, it causes a lower incidence of cesarean delivery, lower frequency of tachysystole with changes in FHR, and non‐reassuring FHR. Synopsis: Titrated oral misoprostol has a similar efficacy to dinoprostone, but with a lower incidence of cesarean delivery and lower frequency of non‐reassuring fetal heart rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]