International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Volume 91, Issue 3 , Pages 254-255 , December 2005

Misoprostol vs. oxytocin for induction of labor

  • E.M. Elhassan

      Affiliations

    • University of Geizera, Wad Medani, Sudan
    • ,
  • O.A. Mirghani

      Affiliations

    • University of Geizera, Wad Medani, Sudan
    • ,
  • I. Adam

      Affiliations

    • Faculty of Medicine, University of Khartoum and Academy of Medical Sciences and Technology, Khartoum, Sudan
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. P.O. Box 102, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine University of Khartoum, Khartoum, Sudan. Tel.: +249912770277; fax: +249183476299.

Received 27 July 2005 ,Accepted 8 August 2005.

References 

  1. Brindley BA, Sokol RJ. Induction and augmentation of labor: bases and method for current practice. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 1988;43:73043
  2. Elhassan E, Mirghani O, Adam I. Intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone as cervical ripening and labor-inducing agents. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2004;85:285–286
  3. Escudero F, Contreras H. A comparative trial of labor induction with misoprostol versus oxytocin. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1997;57:139–143
  4. de Aquino MM, Cecatti JG. Misoprostol versus oxytocin for labor induction in term and post-term pregnancy: randomized controlled trial. Sao Paulo Med J. 2003;121:102–106

PII: S0020-7292(05)00442-X

doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2005.08.003

International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics
Volume 91, Issue 3 , Pages 254-255 , December 2005

Article Tools