Extra-amniotic saline versus extraamniotic misoprostol for ripening the unfavorable cervix

Abstract EN

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of two methods (extra-amniotic saline instillation and extra-amniotic misoprostol) for ripening the unfavorable cervix.

The study was set at the labour room in Basrah Maternity (teaching) hospital with 300 bed capacity.

It is a prospective comparative study conducted to compare extra-amniotic saline instillation and extra-amniotic Misoprostol for ripening the unfavorable cervix.

Group I (Extra-amniotic saline instillation): Foley’s catheter with extra-amniotic normal saline instillation at a rate of 1ml/min.

Group II (extra-amniotic Misoprostol): The cervix was ripped with 25mcg.

Misoprostol injected extra-amniotically using a Foley’s catheter.

The clinical trial involved a total (121) pregnant women, in group I (57) and in group II (64).

The success rates in achieving cervical ripening were 100% for both groups.

The mean post ripening Bishop’s score in group II (primigravidae (7.5 ± 1.5), multigravidae (7.86 ± 1.39)) were significantly higher than those in group I (primigravidae (6.01±0.4), multigravidae (6.07± 0.47)).

The mean ripening time (hrs) in group II (primigravidae (6.15± 2.1), multigravidae (4.03± 1.3)) were significantly shorter than those in group I (primigravidae (7.71± 1.02), multigravidae (6.4± 1.02)).

The mean induction-delivery time (hrs) in group II (primigravidae (5.3± 2), multigravidae (3.8± 1.4)) were significantly shorter than those in group I (primigravidae (7,7± 2.03), multigravidae (5.92± 1.9)).

The vast majority of women under study had vaginal delivery (80.7% in group I and 96.8% in group II).

In conclusion, EAM was quick and effective method for ripening the cervix, it requires little training for application so that it is a suitable method for patients who require rapid induction of labour.