Intravaginal glyceryl trinitrate and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labor

Evaluation of nitric acid donor, transdermal glycerol trinitrate patches for facilitating cervical ripening: a randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transdermal glycerol trinitrate skin patches as an additive and effective agent for facilitating cervical ripening for labour induction.

METHODS

This was a double-blinded prospective randomised clinical trial carried out in a major obstetric unit in India. Women who planned for labour induction were randomly allocated for induction either by combined application of glycerol trinitrate skin patches [GTN patch] and intracervical dinoprostone gel or by the gel only. Sample randomisation was done using a stratified block randomisation technique with a sealed envelope. The numbers designating the group allocation sequence were concealed from doctors, research staff, and investigators. Six hourly improvements were assessed in the modified Bishop's score, induction-delivery time interval, the need for oxytocin, maternal side effects and foetal outcomes. Data were analysed using SPSS software.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Recruitment Bishop scores, parity and gestational age were matched in both cases and the control group. The modified Bishop's score was statistically improved in study groups, as evidenced compositely and irrespective of parity. The two groups appeared to have no significant differences regarding other outcomes. The additional application of the GTN patch seems helpful to accelerate the progress of labour but could not yield any favourable labour outcome. The GTN patch does not impose additional feto-maternal adverse effects apart from increased incidences of headaches.

Misoprostol plus isosorbide mononitrate versus misoprostol alone for cervical ripening during labor induction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the maternal and neonatal outcomes of misoprostol+isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN) versus misoprostol alone (control) in promoting cervical ripening during labor induction.

METHODS

We searched five databases from inception until 05-May-2021. We assessed risk of bias of RCTs, meta-analyzed 23 endpoints, and pooled them as mean difference or risk ratio with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Overall, five RCTs met the inclusion criteria, comprising 850 patients (426 and 424 patients were allocated to misoprostol+ISMN and misoprostol group, respectively). Overall, the RCTs had a low risk of bias. Pertaining to maternal delivery-related outcomes, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the mean interval from drug administration to delivery, rate of vaginal delivery, rate of cesarean section delivery, and rate of need for oxytocin augmentation. Pertaining to maternal drug-related side effects, the rate of maternal headache was significantly higher in disfavor of the misoprostol+ISMN compared with misoprostol alone. However, the rates of maternal nausea, hypotension, flushing, palpitation, dizziness, postpartum hemorrhage, and uterine tachysystole did not differ between both groups. Pertaining to neonatal outcomes, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding rates of NICU admission, meconium-stained amniotic fluid, and Apgar score <7 at five minutes.

CONCLUSION

Compared with misoprostol alone, co-administration of misoprostol+ISMN did not correlate with superior maternal delivery-related outcomes. The rate of maternal headache was significantly higher in disfavor of the misoprostol+ISMN group. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding neonatal endpoints.

Nitric oxide donors for cervical ripening and induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Sometimes it is necessary to bring on labour artificially because of safety concerns for the mother or baby. This review is one of a series of reviews of methods of labour induction using a standardised protocol.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of NO donors (isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN), isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN), nitroglycerin and sodium nitroprusside) for third trimester cervical ripening or induction of labour, in comparison with placebo or no treatment or other treatments from a predefined hierarchy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (15 August 2016) and the reference lists of trial reports.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Clinical trials comparing NO donors for cervical ripening or labour induction with other methods listed above it on a predefined list of methods of labour induction. Interventions include NO donors (isosorbide mononitrate, isosorbide dinitrate, nitroglycerin and sodium nitroprusside) compared with other methods listed above it on a predefined list of methods of labour induction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This review is part of a series of reviews focusing on methods of induction of labour, based on a generic protocol. Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. In this update, the quality of the evidence for the main comparison was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 trials (including a total of 4777 women). Included studies compared NO donors with placebo, vaginal prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), intracervical PGE2, vaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter. The majority of the included studies were assessed as being at low risk of bias. Nitric oxide versus placebo There was no evidence of a difference for any of the primary outcomes analysed: vaginal delivery not achieved in 24 hours (risk ratio (RR) 0.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.15; one trial, 238 women; low-quality evidence), uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate (FHR) changes (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.62; two trials, 300 women; low-quality evidence), caesarean section (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.11; nine trials, 2624 women; moderate-quality evidence) or serious neonatal morbidity/perinatal death (average RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.08 to 33.26; two trials, 1712 women; low-quality evidence). There were no instances of serious maternal morbidity or death (one study reported this outcome).There was a reduction in an unfavourable cervix at 12 to 24 hours in women treated with NO donors (average RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90; four trials, 762 women), and this difference was observed in both subgroups of standard release and slow release formulation. Women who received NO donors were less likely to experience uterine hyperstimulation without FHR rate changes (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.80; one trial, 200 women), and more likely to experience side effects, including nausea, headache and vomiting. Nitric oxide donors versus vaginal prostaglandins There was no evidence of any difference between groups for uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes or caesarean section (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.21; three trials, 571 women). Serious neonatal morbidity and serious maternal morbidity were not reported. There were fewer women in the NO donor group who did not achieve a vaginal delivery within 24 hours (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.86; one trial, 400 primiparae women). Nitric oxide donors versus intracervical prostaglandins One study reported a reduction in the number of women who had not achieved a vaginal delivery within 24 hours with NO donors (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.86; one trial, 400 women). This result should be interpreted with caution as the information was extracted from an abstract only and a full report of the study is awaited. No differences were observed between groups for uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.74; one trial, 42 women) or serious neonatal morbidity/perinatal death (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.74; one trial, 42 women). Fewer women in the NO donor group underwent a caesarean section in comparison to women who received intracervical prostaglandins (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.90; two trials, 442 women). No study reported on the outcome serious maternal morbidity or death. Nitric oxide donors versus vaginal misoprostol There was a reduction in the rate of uterine hyperstimulation with FHR changes with NO donors (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.37; three trials, 281 women). There were no differences in caesarean section rates (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.21; 761 women; six trials) and no cases of serious neonatal morbidity/perinatal death were reported. One study found that women in the NO donor group were more likely to not deliver within 24 hours (RR 5.33, 95% CI 1.62 to 17.55; one trial, 150 women). Serious maternal morbidity or death was not reported.In terms of secondary outcomes, there was an increase in cervix unchanged/unfavourable with NO (RR 3.43, 95% CI 2.07 to 5.66; two trials, 151 women) and an increase in the need for oxytocin augmentation with NO induction (RR 2.67, 95% CI 1.31 to 5.45; 7 trials; 767 women), although there was evidence of significant heterogeneity which could not be fully explained. Uterine hyperstimulation without FHR was lower in the NO group, as was meconium-stained liquor, Apgar score less than seven at five minutes and analgesia requirements. Nitric oxide donors versus intracervical catheter There was no evidence on any difference between the effects of NO and the use of a Foley catheter for induction of labour for caesarean section (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.39 to 2.59; one trial, 80 women). No other primary outcomes were reported. One study of 75 participants did not contribute any data to the review.For all comparisons, women who received NO donors were more likely to experience side effects such as headache, nausea or vomiting.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available data suggests that NO donors can be a useful tool in the process of induction of labour causing the cervix to be more favourable in comparison to placebo. However, additional data are needed to assess the true impact of NO donors on all important labour process and delivery outcomes.

Nitric oxide donors for cervical ripening and induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Sometimes it is necessary to bring on labour artificially because of safety concerns for the mother or baby. This review is one of a series of reviews of methods of labour induction using a standardised protocol.Induction of labour occurs in approximately 20% of pregnancies in the UK. The ideal agent for induction of labour would induce cervical ripening without causing uterine contractions. Currently most commonly used cervical ripening or induction agents result in uterine activity or contractions, or both. Cervical ripening without uterine contractility could occur safely in an outpatient setting and it may be expected that this would result in greater maternal satisfaction and lower costs.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of nitric oxide (NO) donors for third trimester cervical ripening or induction of labour, in comparison with placebo or no treatment or other treatments from a predefined hierarchy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 December 2010) and the reference lists of trial reports and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Clinical trials comparing NO donors for cervical ripening or labour induction to other methods listed above it on a predefined list of methods of labour induction. The trials include some form of random allocation to either group; and report one or more of the prestated outcomes. NO donors (isosorbide mononitrate, nitroglycerin and sodium nitroprusside) are compared to other methods listed above it on a predefined list of methods of labour induction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This review is part of a series of reviews focusing on methods of induction of labour. Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We considered 19 trials; we included 10 (including a total of 1889 women) trials, excluded eight trials and one trial report is awaiting classification. Included studies compared NO donors to placebo, vaginal prostaglandin E2, intracervical PGE2 and vaginal misoprostol. All included studies were of a generally high standard with a low risk of bias.There are very limited data available to compare nitric oxide donors to any other induction agent. There is no evidence of any difference between any of the prespecified outcomes when comparing NO donors to other induction agents, with the exception of an increase in maternal side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

NO donors do not appear currently to be a useful tool in the process of induction of labour. More studies are required to examine how NO donors may work alongside established induction of labour protocols, especially those based in outpatient settings.

Oral misoprostol and vaginal isosorbide mononitrate for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To estimate whether vaginal isosorbide mononitrate, added to oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction, shortens time to vaginal delivery.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized trial was conducted. Women scheduled for labor induction between 32 and 42 weeks and with unfavorable cervices (modified Bishop score 6 or lower) were randomized to receive oral misoprostol every 4 hours, up to four doses, with or without isosorbide mononitrate every 6 hours, up to two doses. A strict protocol was used, including timing of oxytocin use and amniotomy. Side effects were assessed 6 hours after study initiation. One hundred forty-two patients were required to detect a change in time to vaginal delivery of 4 hours (alpha=.05 and beta=.20). Data were analyzed by intent to treat. Student's t, chi square, Fisher's exact, and Mann-Whitney tests were used where appropriate with P< or =.05 deemed significant.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-six women were randomized; three were excluded after randomization. Seventy-eight women received misoprostol, and 78 received misoprostol with isosorbide mononitrate. Demographic characteristics were similar between groups. The time to vaginal delivery was not reduced when isosorbide mononitrate was added to misoprostol. Cesarean delivery rates and contraction and fetal heart rate abnormalities were similar between groups. Side effects were also similar between groups, except that women given isosorbide mononitrate experienced headaches more often. Neonatal outcomes were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

The addition of vaginal isosorbide mononitrate to oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction did not reduce time to vaginal delivery and was associated with a greater incidence of headache.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00374621.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Nitric oxide in the human uterine cervix: endogenous ripening factor

The human uterine cervix can produce nitric oxide (NO), a free radical with an ultra-short half-life. The release of NO changes during pregnancy and is increased in early nonviable pregnancies compared to normal uncomplicated pregnancies. This review concentrates on the role of NO release in cervical ripening in pregnant women. Also some suggestions on future aspects are discussed.