COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF ISOSORBIDE MONONITRATE AND MISOPROSTOL VERSUS MISOPROSTOL ALONE FOR CERVICAL RIPENING AND INDUCTION OF LABOR: A RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND STUDY

MOLLY SHARMA; DEEPAK BHARDWAJ

doi:10.22159/ijcpr.2024v16i5.5067

Authors

MOLLY SHARMA Department of Health and Family Welfare, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Himachal Pradesh
DEEPAK BHARDWAJ Department of Health and Family Welfare, Dr. Rajendra Prasad Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Himachal Pradesh

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ijcpr.2024v16i5.5067

Keywords:

Cervical ripening, Labor induction, Isosorbide mononitrate, Misoprostol, Maternal-fetal outcomes, Randomized double-blind study

Abstract

Objective: Induction of labor is a common obstetric procedure aimed at initiating uterine contractions before the spontaneous onset of labor, essential for achieving vaginal delivery. Misoprostol, a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analog, is widely used for cervical ripening and labor induction but is associated with potential side effects. Isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN), a nitric oxide donor, has emerged as a potential adjunct to enhance cervical ripening. This randomized, double-blind study evaluates the comparative efficacy of ISMN combined with misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for cervical ripening and labor induction in term pregnancies.

Methods: This study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Dr. R. P. G. M. C. Kangra, Himachal Pradesh, from July 2019 to June 2020. A total of 100 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomized into two groups: Group 1 received ISMN 40 mg and misoprostol 25 mcg, while Group 2 received misoprostol 25 mcg and a placebo. The primary outcome was the induction to active phase interval. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes, and side effects. Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-Square and unpaired t-tests, with a p-value<0.05 considered significant.

Results: Group 1 (ISMN+misoprostol) showed a significantly shorter induction to active phase interval (11.85±3.24 h) compared to Group 2 (misoprostol alone) (19.82±3.7 h, p=0.004). The mode of delivery did not significantly differ between groups, with similar rates of vaginal delivery and cesarean sections. Neonatal outcomes, including birth weight and APGAR scores, were comparable between the groups. Maternal complications were not significantly different, with no increased incidence of hyperstimulation or postpartum hemorrhage in group 1.

Conclusion: The combination of ISMN with misoprostol is more effective in reducing the induction to active phase interval compared to misoprostol alone without increasing adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. This combination therapy could represent a significant advancement in the management of labor induction.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bullarbo M, Orrskog ME, Andersch B, Granstrom L, Norstrom A, Ekerhovd E. Outpatient vaginal administration of the nitric oxide donor isosorbide mononitrate for cervical ripening and labor induction postterm: a randomized controlled study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;196(1):50.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.08.034, PMID 17240231.

Habib SM, Emam SS, Saber AS. Outpatient cervical ripening with nitric oxide donor isosorbide mononitrate prior to induction of labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2008;101(1):57-61. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.09.027, PMID 18222450.

Thomson AJ, Lunan CB, Cameron AD, Cameron IT, Greer IA, Norman JE. Nitric oxide donors induce ripening of the human uterine cervix: a randomised controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(9):1054-7. doi: 10.1111/j.14710528.1997.tb12066.x, PMID 9307534.

Abdellah MS, Hussien M, Aboalhassan A. Intravaginal administration of isosorbide mononitrate and misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;284(1):25-30. doi: 10.1007/s00404-010-1572-4, PMID 20582425.

Chanrachakul B, Herabutya Y, Punyavachira P. Potential efficacy of nitric oxide for cervical ripening in pregnancy at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2000;71(3):217-9. doi: 10.1016/s0020-7292(00)00284-8, PMID 11102606.

Vaisanen Tommiska M. Nitric oxide in human uterine cervix: role in cervical ripening. Finland: University of Helsinki; 2006.

Ekerhovd E, Brannstrom M, Weijdegard B, Norstrom A. Nitric oxide synthases in the human cervix at term pregnancy and effects of nitric oxide on cervical smooth muscle contractility. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183(3):610-6. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.105901, PMID 10992181.

Chanrachakul B, Herabutya Y, Punyavachira P. Randomized comparison of glyceryl trinitrate and prostaglandin E2 for cervical ripening at term. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(4):549-53. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00990-x, PMID 11004357.

Thomson AJ, Lunan CB, Ledingham M, Howat RC, Cameron IT, Greer IA. Randomised trial of nitric oxide donor versus prostaglandin for cervical ripening before first trimester termination of pregnancy. Lancet. 1998;352(9134):1093-6. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)01289-6, PMID 9798584.

Noor N, Sharma A, Parveen S, Ali SM. Intravaginal administration of misoprostol alone versus misoprostol and isosorbide mononitrate for cervical ripening and labor induction. J Appl Adv Res. 2017;2(1):37-42. doi: 10.21839/jaar.2017.v2i1.52.

Collingham JP, Fuh KC, Caughey AB, Pullen KM, Lyell DJ, El Sayed YY. Oral misoprostol and vaginal isosorbide mononitrate for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(1):121-6. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e408f2, PMID 20567177.

Sherif H, Ahmed M, Amgad A. Comparison between misoprostol and isosorbide mononitrate and misoprostol in preinduction cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;35(3216):0258.

Bollapragada SS, MacKenzie F, Norrie JD, Eddama O, Petrou S, Reid M. Randomised placebo-controlled trial of outpatient (at home) cervical ripening with isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) prior to induction of labour clinical trial with analyses of efficacy and acceptability the IMOP study. BJOG. 2009;116(9):1185-95. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02216.x, PMID 19624440.

Leduc D, Biringer A, Lee L, Dy J. Clinical practice obstetrics committee special contributors. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35(9):840-57. doi: 10.1016/S17012163(15)30842-2, PMID 24099451.

Ghosh A, Lattey KR, Kelly AJ. Nitric oxide donors for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 5;12(12):CD006901. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006901.pub3, PMID 27918616.