Induction of labor in twin pregnancies with oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone--is it effective and safe?
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness and safety of oral misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for the induction of labor in twin pregnancies.


METHODS
All twin pregnancies ≥ 34 weeks 0 days that were induced with either misoprostol or dinoprostone in St. Hedwig Hospital between 2002 and 2013 were included in this retrospective study. Length of induction, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes were compared between the two groups.


RESULTS
After identifying 186 twin mothers matching the inclusion criteria, 154 women were induced with misoprostol (group A) and 32 with dinoprostone (group B). There were no differences in demographic data between the groups. Rates of successful vaginal delivery (53.9% versus 56.3%) and length of induction to delivery (30.2 h versus 26.9 h) were also similar. There were slightly higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage in group B (16.6% versus 10.8%), but without reaching statistical significance. Neonatal outcomes regarding umbilical artery pH <7.20 and one minute Apgar also were without significant differences.


CONCLUSIONS
Study data indicate that oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone are similarly effective and safe for the induction of labor in twin gestations. Further trials with larger series are needed to confirm these results.
['Huber|Georgine|G|', 'Schütz|Heike|H|', 'Seelbach-Göbel|Birgit|B|']
D000282:Administration, Intravaginal D000284:Administration, Oral D000328:Adult D015232:Dinoprostone D005260:Female D006801:Humans D007751:Labor, Induced D016595:Misoprostol D010120:Oxytocics D011247:Pregnancy D059285:Pregnancy, Twin
misoprostol Dinoprostone twin gestation labor induction time of delivery