Randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy between a vaginal misoprostol loading and non-loading dose regimen for second-trimester pregnancy termination.

AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol loading dose regimen with non-loading dose regimen for termination of second-trimester pregnancy with live fetuses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted on pregnant women with a live fetus at 14-28 weeks. The patients were randomly allocated to receive either the vaginal misoprostol loading dose regimen (600 mcg, then 400 mcg every 6 h) or the non-loading dose regimen (400 mcg every 6 h). Failure to abort within 48 h was considered to be a failure. RESULTS: Of 157 recruited women, 77 were assigned to be in group 1 (loading group) and 80 were in group 2 (non-loading group). The median abortion time was not statistically different between the groups (14.08; 95% confidence interval: 12.45-17.77 h and 14.58; 95% confidence interval: 12.8-17.27 h, P > 0.05). The rates of abortion within 24 h and 48 h were also comparable between the groups. Fever and chills were more common in the loading group. No other serious complications, such as postpartum hemorrhage and uterine rupture, were found. CONCLUSION: Vaginal misoprostol in the loading dose regimen had a similar efficacy to the non-loading dose regimen but was associated with more adverse maternal effects.

Comparative evaluation of 50 microgram oral misoprostol and 25 microgram intravaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the efficacy and safety of 50 µg oral misoprostol and 25 µg intravaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term. METHODS: This non-blinded, randomized clinical trial included 228 pregnant women at term with obstetric or medical indications for induction of labour. Women either took 50 µg misoprostol orally (two 25 µg tablets) or had one 25 µg tablet of misoprostol inserted in the posterior vaginal fornix. In each group, misoprostol administration was repeated every four hours in the same dose until regular uterine contractions were established or to a maximum of five doses. Time to delivery and outcome data for each group were compared. RESULTS: Of the 228 women, eight (3.5%) were excluded from the analysis as they withdrew their consent after randomization. Mean induction-to-delivery interval was similar in both groups (21.22 hours in the oral group vs. 20.15 hours in the vaginal group; P = 0.58). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to the number of women who delivered within 24 hours or who required oxytocin augmentation of labour, the mode of delivery, and neonatal outcomes (P > 0.05). Uterine hyperstimulation occurred in two women who received misoprostol vaginally, but not in any of the women in the oral misoprostol group. CONCLUSION: Oral misoprostol in a dose of 50 µg every four hours, to a maximum of five doses, has the potential to induce labour as safely and effectively as 25 µg misoprostol administered vaginally every four hours.

Objectifs : Évaluer et comparer l'efficacité et l'innocuité de 50 µg de misoprostol par voie orale et de 25 µg de misoprostol par voie intravaginale pour le déclenchement du travail à terme. Méthodes : Cet essai clinique randomisé n'ayant pas été mené à l'insu portait sur 228 femmes enceintes à terme qui présentaient des indications obstétricales ou médicales en ce qui concerne le déclenchement du travail. Ces femmes ont été affectées au hasard à un groupe devant prendre 50 µg de misoprostol par voie orale (deux comprimés de 25 µg) ou à un groupe devant se faire insérer un comprimé de 25 µg de misoprostol dans le cul-de-sac postérieur du vagin. Dans chacun de ces groupes, l'administration de la même dose de misoprostol a été répétée toutes les quatre heures jusqu'à ce que des contractions utérines régulières aient été établies ou jusqu'à l'administration d'un maximum de cinq doses. Le délai jusqu'à l'accouchement et les données quant aux issues ont été comparés chez ces groupes. Résultats : Huit (3,5 %) de ces 228 femmes ont été exclues de l'analyse puisqu'elles ont révoqué leur consentement à la suite de la randomisation. L'intervalle déclenchement-accouchement moyen était semblable dans les deux groupes (21,22 heures au sein du groupe « oral ¼ vs 20,15 heures au sein du groupe « vaginal ¼; P = 0,58). Aucune différence significative n'a été constatée entre les deux groupes en ce qui concerne le nombre de femmes ayant accouché dans les 24 heures ou ayant nécessité une accélération du travail à l'oxytocine, le mode d'accouchement et les issues néonatales (P > 0,05). Une hyperstimulation utérine s'est manifestée chez deux des femmes qui avaient reçu du misoprostol par voie vaginale; toutefois, aucune des femmes ayant reçu du misoprostol par voie orale n'a été affectée par un tel phénomène. Conclusion : Le misoprostol administré par voie orale à raison de 50 µg toutes les quatre heures, jusqu'à un maximum de cinq doses, présente le potentiel de déclencher le travail de façon tout aussi sûre et efficace que le misoprostol administré par voie vaginale à raison de 25 µg toutes les quatre heures.

Comparison of the effect of vaginal misoprostol and evening primrose oil capsule with misoprostol alone on the consequences of abortion in women with intrauterine fetal death: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Misoprostol is the choice drug for inducing an abortion with intrauterine fetal death, but it has several side effects that increase with accumulating the dose received. Induction abortion with cheap and non-invasive methods with minimal complications is essential. This study aimed to compare the effect vaginal misoprostol plus vaginal evening primrose oil capsule with vaginal misoprostol alone on the consequences of abortion in pregnant women with intrauterine fetal death at 12-20 weeks of pregnancy. METHODS: This study is a randomized, triple-blind clinical trial with two parallel groups at a ratio of 1:1. We randomized 82 women with indications of termination of pregnancy due to intrauterine fetal death into two groups. The experimental group (n = 42) received 200 mcg of misoprostol tablet with 1000 mg evening primrose oil capsule intravaginal. The control group (n = 40) received 200 mcg of misoprostol tablet with 1000 mg evening primrose oil placebo capsule intravaginal. Both groups received the drugs every 4 h for up to five doses. The primary outcome was the mean induction-to-fetal expulsion interval. Secondary outcomes were the mean dose of misoprostol, the highest pain intensity in the induction-to-fetal expulsion interval, the frequency of participants requiring blood transfusion, curettage, and the frequency of side effects of misoprostol or evening primrose oil. Pain intensity was measured through the Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS: The mean age of the experimental group was 32.30 ± 6.19 years, and the control group was 30.27 ± 7.68 years. The mean gestational age of the experimental group was 15.29 ± 2.26 weeks, and the control group was 15.10 ± 1.89 weeks. The mean induction-to-fetal expulsion interval in the experimental group (3.12 ± 2.17 h) was significantly lower than that in the control group (8.40 ± 4.1 h) (p < 0.001). The mean dose of misoprostol received in the experimental group (271.42 ± 115.39 mcg) was significantly lower than that in the control group (520 ± 201.53 mcg) (p < 0.001). Also, the mean pain intensity in the experimental group (5.02 ± 0.60) was significantly lower than that in the control group (8.65 ± 1.001) (p < 0.001). The two groups were not significantly different in the frequency of blood transfusion requirements, analgesia and drug side effects. The need for curettage in the experimental group (4.8%) was significantly lower than that in the control group (47.5%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Vaginal administration of evening primrose oil with misoprostol reduced duration of time of fetal expulsion, pain intensity, mean dose of misoprostol received, and the need for curettage in participants. Therefore, we suggest this method for induced abortion in women with intrauterine fetal death. TRIAL REGISTRATION: IRCT20181207041873N3. Dated 16/2/2021 prospectively registered https://en.irct.ir/user/trial/53681/view .

Comparison of the effect of oral and vaginal misoprostol on labor induction: updating a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies.

OBJECTIVES: This study is aimed to compare the effect of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol to induce labor as a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed [Medline], Scopus, Web of science, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched using the relevant keywords. All RCTs comparing the effect of oral vs vaginal misoprostol on labor induction were considered. The Cochrane Risk of Bias checklist was used for assessing quality of included RCTs. All statistical analyses were completed using STATA (Version 16) and Revman (Version 5). RESULTS: Thirty-three RCTs with 5162 patients (1560 in oral and 2602 in vaginal groups) were included in this meta-analysis. Labor induction length did differ significantly between the two routes of misoprostol administration [Standardized Mean Difference: 0.40 h, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34, 0.46; I2: 66.35%; P = 0.04]. In addition, the risk of neonatal death, tachysystole, uterine hyperstimulation, preeclampsia, non-FHR and abortion was lower in the oral misoprostol group and the risk of hypertonus, PROM, oxytocin need and cesarean fever was higher in this group than the vaginal misoprostol group. CONCLUSIONS: Based on results of this meta-analysis, it can be inferred that currently, clinical specialists can decide to use this drug orally or vaginally on a case-by-case basis, depending on the condition of the pregnant mother and the baby.

Foley catheter (80 vs 60 mL) and misoprostol for labor induction in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Induction of labor is a common intervention in obstetrics worldwide. Foley catheter is a commonly used mechanical method for labor induction in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix at term. We hypothesize that a higher volume of Foley catheter (80 mL vs 60 mL) will shorten the induction-delivery interval for labor induction in nulliparous women at term with an unfavorable cervix with simultaneous use of vaginal misoprostol. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of transcervical Foley catheter (80 mL vs 60 mL) with simultaneous use of vaginal misoprostol on the induction-delivery interval in nulliparous women at term with an unfavorable cervix for induction of labor. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-blind, single-center, randomized controlled trial, nulliparous women with a term singleton gestation with unfavorable cervix were randomized to either group 1 (Foley catheter [80 mL] simultaneously with vaginal misoprostol 25 µg every 4h) or group 2 (Foley catheter [60 mL] with vaginal misoprostol 25 µg every 4h). The primary outcome was induction-delivery interval. Secondary outcomes were duration of the latent phase of labor, number of doses of vaginal misoprostol required, mode of delivery, as well as maternal and neonatal morbidity. Analyses were based on the intention-to-treat method. A sample size of 100 women per group (N=200) was selected. RESULTS: Between September 2021 to September 2022, 200 nulliparous women at term with an unfavorable cervix were randomized to labor induction with either FC (80 mL vs 60 mL) and vaginal misoprostol. Induction delivery interval (in minutes) was statistically significantly shorter in Foley catheter (80 mL) (median [interquartile range], 604 [524-719] vs 846 [596-990]; [P<.001]). Median time to labor onset (in minutes) (240 [120-300] vs 360 [180-600]; P<.001) was also shorter in group 1 (80 mL). The number of doses of misoprostol required for labor induction was statistically significantly less than with 80 mL (mean±standard deviation, 1.4±0.7 vs 2.4±1.3; P<.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the mode of delivery (vaginal delivery: 69 vs 80; odds ratio, 0.55 [1.1-0.3]; P=.104 and cesarean delivery: 29 vs 17; odds ratio, 0.99 [0.9-1.1]; P=.063, respectively). The relative risk of delivery within 12 hours with 80 mL was 2.4 [95% confidence interval, 1.68-3.43], P<.001. Maternal and neonatal morbidity were similar across the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: FC (80 mL) simultaneously with vaginal misoprostol significantly shortens the induction-delivery interval (P<.001) in nulliparous women at term with an unfavorable cervix, as compared with Foley catheter 60 mL and vaginal misoprostol.

Comparison of vaginal and buccal misoprostol after mifepristone for medication abortion through 70 days of gestation: A retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the proportion of complete abortion without surgical intervention for patients who chose medication abortion with vaginal compared to buccal misoprostol following oral mifepristone through 70 days of gestation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study. We reviewed charts via electronic medical record data abstraction of patients receiving medication abortion with mifepristone and buccal or vaginal misoprostol between September 1, 2017 and August 1, 2019. Primary outcome was complete abortion without surgical intervention for any indication. Secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy and uterine aspiration for indications other than ongoing pregnancy. RESULTS: There were 14,504 encounters included in the data set. Of the 4814 patients who took vaginal misoprostol and the 4011 patients who took buccal misoprostol for whom follow up data is available, 4640 (96.4%) and 3917 (97.7%) had a complete abortion without surgical intervention, respectively (p = 0.002). At <64 days of gestation, complete abortion was 96.6% for vaginal administration compared to 98.0% for buccal (p = 0.001). At 64 to 70 days of gestation, complete abortion was 92.7% for vaginal administration compared to 93.2% for buccal (p = 0.08). Of the 1128 patients who took vaginal misoprostol at less than 6 hours after mifepristone, 95.3% experienced a complete abortion. CONCLUSION: Buccal administration of misoprostol is associated with a higher proportion of complete abortion before 64 days of gestation compared to vaginal misoprostol. Clinically, vaginal misoprostol is an effective route of administration through 70 days of gestation. IMPLICATIONS: Medication abortion with vaginal misoprostol is effective when administered through 70 days of gestation and with shorter intervals between mifepristone and misoprostol. Prospective research to better estimate effectiveness is warranted. Expanding medication abortion options promotes patient autonomy amid increasing restrictions and bans on abortion.

Is vaginal misoprostol more effective than oral misoprostol for cervical ripening in obese women?

Objective: To determine if vaginal misoprostol is more effective than oral misoprostol for cervical ripening in obese women.Study design: A retrospective cohort study of obese women undergoing induction of labor from Jan 2013 to Dec 2016 with singleton, viable pregnancies beyond 37 completed weeks of gestational age. Women with an initial Bishop score of 7 or less, with a cervical dilatation of less than 2 cm, who received either vaginal or oral misoprostol as a cervical ripening agent, were included. Primary outcome was interval from the start of induction to the attainment of 3 cm cervical dilatation. Secondary outcomes included the interval from the start of induction to delivery and the rate of cesarean delivery (CD).Result: Of women who met the inclusion criteria, 966 (75.5%) women received oral misoprostol and 314 (24.5%) received vaginal misoprostol. The mean time-interval from the start of induction to attainment of 3-cm dilatation was shorter in the vaginal group (10.5 ± 10.4 h) compared to the oral group (17.2 ± 11.5 h), (p < .0001). Significantly shorter times to delivery were also noted in the vaginal group (17.4 h for vaginal vs. 24.8 h for oral, p < .0001). In the subgroup analysis of nulliparous women, shorter time intervals from the start of induction to attainment of 3-cm dilatation, as well as to delivery, were noted in the vaginal misoprostol group (p < .0001 for both). Multiple linear regression model confirmed route of misoprostol administration as an independent variable in predicting the outcomes (time from start of induction to 3 cm as well as to delivery). Significant findings amongst neonatal outcomes included lower umbilical artery pH and higher rates of neonatal jaundice in the oral misoprostol group.Conclusion: In a population of obese women undergoing induction of labor, vaginal administration of misoprostol was associated shorter time intervals from the start of induction to the attainment of 3 cm of dilatation, as well as to delivery, without increasing the rate of cesarean deliveries or the incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Medical abortion with mifepristone and vaginal misoprostol between 64 and 70 days' gestation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes with mifepristone 200 mg orally followed 24-48 h later by misoprostol 800 mcg vaginally for medical abortion at 64-70 days of gestation. STUDY DESIGN: We reviewed electronic databases and medical records for medical abortion cases at 64-70 days' gestation at British Pregnancy Advisory Service clinics in England and Wales from May 2015 through October 2016. Women selected in-office follow-up or self-evaluation of abortion outcome using a checklist along with low-sensitivity urine pregnancy testing. We excluded cases in which we could not locate records and when women did not proceed with medical abortion, did not use misoprostol following mifepristone if abortion had not occurred and did not attend a scheduled follow-up assessment. We analyzed demographic characteristics, treatment outcomes and significant adverse events. We defined treatment success as complete abortion without surgical evacuation and without continuing pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 2743 cases identified, we could not locate 40 charts and excluded 30 cases, leaving a final sample of 2673. Overall, 2538 (94.9%, 95% CI 94.1-95.8) women had a successful medical abortion. Reasons for failure included continuing pregnancy (n=90, 3.4%, 95% CI 2.7-4.1), retained nonviable pregnancy (n=2, 0.1%, 95% CI 0-0.2) and incomplete abortion (n=43, 1.6%, 95% CI 1.1-2.1). Of those with continuing pregnancies, 81 underwent a uterine aspiration and 9 opted to continue the pregnancy. Thirty-five (1.3%, 95% CI 0.9-1.7) women had significant adverse events; 16 (0.6%, 95% CI 0.3-0.9) underwent an in-hospital aspiration. Pelvic infection (n=4, 0.2%) and transfusion (n=1, 0.03%) occurred rarely. CONCLUSION: Medical abortion from 64 to 70 days with mifepristone and vaginal misoprostol is effective with a low rate of serious adverse events. IMPLICATIONS: Medical abortion between 64 and 70 days of gestation may be offered on an outpatient basis using mifepristone and vaginal misoprostol. Service provision without an in-person follow-up is feasible. Not all women with a continuing pregnancy after medical abortion treatment opt to have an aspiration procedure.

Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage.

BACKGROUND: In recent years' medical management with misoprostol is an effective alternative to surgical evacuation. But there is a dearth of evidence to reveal the effectiveness of the different routes of misoprostol and satisfaction rate among the patients treated with these routes. AIM: This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and patient's satisfaction rate of vaginal versus oral misoprostol. METHODS: It was a prospective non-interventional study. One hundred women of having missed abortion confirmed by ultrasonography examination were enrolled in the trial. Fifty-eight subjects were administered 200 mcg of oral and 42 subjects received 200 mcg of vaginal misoprostol every four hours up to four doses. If complete expulsion did not occur 12 hours after the last dose, the surgical evacuation was done. RESULTS: There was no significant statistical difference between the effectiveness of treatment with vaginal (78.57%) and oral misoprostol (79.31%) (p = 0.928). The difference between Patients' satisfaction at the time of discharge for the vaginal group (64.29%) and oral group (65.52%) was not statistically significant (P = 0.991). There was an increase in patients' satisfaction for both groups at the follow-up session, but still, the difference was not significant (P = 0.897). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that there is no statistical difference between the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of oral and vaginal misoprostol in the treatment of missed abortion.

Comparative study of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour, maternal and foetal outcome.

BACKGROUND: Misoprostol is a new promising agent for cervical ripening and induction of labour .The ideal dose, route and frequency of administration of misoprostol are still under investigation. Although, vaginal application of misoprostol has been validated as a reasonable mean of induction, there is a patient resistance to digital examination and there is a risk of ascending infection. For this reason, oral administration of misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction has been tried. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare 50µg of oral misoprostol versus 25µg of intravaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term and maternal, foetal outcomes. METHODS: Two hundred women who were at term, with indication for induction of labour and Bishop scores of ≤5 were randomly assigned to receive misoprostol 50µg or 25µg intravaginal, every 4-6 hours, for a maximum of 5 doses. In either group, pregnant females with inadequate uterine contractions despite being given maximum 5 doses of misoprostol, were augmented using oxytocin. The primary outcome measure was time-interval from induction to vaginal delivery and vaginal delivery rate within 24 hours. RESULTS: The median induction to vaginal delivery time in oral group (12.92h) and vaginal group (14.04 h) was not significant. Oral misoprostol resulted in more number of vaginal deliveries as compared to vaginal misoprostol (94% as compared to 86%), which was not significant. There was a significantly higher incidence of uterine tachysystole in the vaginal group, as compared to oral group. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to oxytocin augmentation, caesarean section rate, analgesic requirement and neonatal outcome. CONCLUSION: Oral misoprostol is as efficacious as vaginal misoprostol because of shorter induction delivery interval, lower caesarean section rates, and lower incidence of failed induction rates. Lower incidence of foetal distress and easy intake are observed if the drug is administered orally.

Medical Termination of Delayed Miscarriage: Four-Year Experience with an Outpatient Protocol / Terminação médica de gravidez inviável do 1° trimestre: quatro anos de experiência com um protocolo de tratamento em ambulatório

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the efficacy of an outpatient protocol with vaginal misoprostol to treat delayed miscarriage. Methods Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on women medically treated for missed abortion with an outpatient protocol. The inclusion criteria were: ultrasound-based diagnosis of missed abortion with less than 10 weeks; no heavy bleeding, infection, inflammatory bowel disease ormisoprostol allergy; nomore than 2 previous spontaneous abortions; the preference of the patient regarding the medical management. The protocol consisted of: 1) a single dose of 800 μg of misoprostol administered intravaginally at the emergency department, after which the patients were discharged home; 2) clinical and ultrasonographic evaluation 48 hours later - if the intrauterine gestational sac was still present, the application of 800 μg of vaginal misoprostol was repeated, and the patients were discharged home; 3) clinical and ultrasonography evaluation 7 days after the initiation of the protocol - if the intrauterine gestational sac was still present, surgical management was proposed. The protocol was introduced in January 2012. Every woman received oral analgesia and written general recommendations. We also gave them a paper form to be presented and filled out at each evaluation. Results Complete miscarriage with misoprostol occurred in 340 women (90.2%). Surgery was performed in 37 (9.8%) patients, representing the global failure rate of the protocol. Miscarriage was completed after the first misoprostol administration in 208 (55.2%) women, with a success rate after the second administration of 78.1% (132/169). The average age of the women with complete resolution using misoprostol was superior to the average age of those who required surgery (33.99 years versus 31.74 years; p = 0.031). Based on the ultrasonographic findings in the first evaluation, the women diagnosed with fetal loss achieved greater success rates compared with those diagnosed with empty sac (p = 0.049). Conclusions We conclude this is an effective and safe option in the majority of delayed miscarriage cases during the first trimester, reducing surgical procedures and their consequences.

Resumo Objetivo Avaliar a eficácia de um protocolo de tratamento médico da gravidez inviável do primeiro trimestre (GI1°T) com misoprostol vaginal em regime de ambulatório. Métodos Análise retrospectiva de dados colhidos prospectivamente de grávidas tratadas com misoprostol vaginal em ambulatório. Os critérios de inclusão foram: diagnóstico de GI1°T com < 10 semanas de gestação; ausência de hemorragia abundante, infeção, doença inflamatória intestinal ou alergia ao misoprostol; 2 abortamentos anteriores; e preferência da paciente por tratamento médico. O protocolo consiste em: dia 0-aplicação demisoprostol intravaginal (800μg) no Serviço de Urgência e alta para o domicílio; dia 2-se persistência de saco gestacional intrauterino, aplicação de segunda dose de misoprostol (800μg) e alta; Dia 7-se persistência de saco gestacional intrauterino, proposto esvaziamento uterino instrumentado. O protocolo foi implementado em janeiro de 2012. Todas as grávidas receberam analgesia oral e informação por escrito com recomendações gerais. Receberam ainda um formulário a ser preenchido em cada vinda à urgência. Resultados Das 377 mulheres incluídas, observou-se abortamento completo em 340 (90,2%). As restantes 37 (9,8%) necessitaram de tratamento cirúrgico - taxa de falência global do protocolo. Em 208 (55,2%), o sucesso foi observado ao fim da 1ª dose, com uma taxa de eficácia da 2ª dose de 78,1% (132/169). A idade média das mulheres com sucesso do tratamento médico foi superior à das mulheres sem sucesso do mesmo (33,99 versus 31,74 anos; p = 0,031). O sucesso do tratamento foi maior quando o diagnóstico ecográfico inicial era de um embrião sem vitalidade comparado com os casos de ovo anembrionado (p = 0.049). Conclusões Conclui-se que esta é uma opção de tratamento eficaz e segura na maioria das situações de GI1°T, evitando a necessidade de internamento e de intervenção cirúrgica.

A Comparison of Vaginal vs. Oral Misoprostol for Induction of Labor-Double Blind Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and safety of 50 µgm misoprostol vaginal with oral for labor induction. METHODS: 110 women at term gestation, Bishop score ≤4, with various indications for labor induction were randomized and double blinded. After decoding 51 women had received misoprostol orally and 52 vaginally, four hourly (maximum six doses) or till woman went into active labor. RESULTS: Statistical analysis was done with SPSS 11.0. In vaginal misoprostol group induction delivery interval was significantly less (9.79 vs. 16.47 h) and successful induction was significantly higher (90.38 vs. 74.51%) than oral group, with in 24 h of induction. As for as dose required is concerned in vaginal group 40.38% women needed two doses for delivery, in contrast 35.29% in oral group maximum six doses were required. CONCLUSION: Vaginal route of misoprostol is more effective labor inducing agent than oral.