202 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24915563)
1. Labor outcomes of obese patients undergoing induction of labor with misoprostol compared to dinoprostone.
Suidan RS; Rondon KC; Apuzzio JJ; Williams SF
Am J Perinatol; 2015 Feb; 30(2):187-92. PubMed ID: 24915563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Transcervical Foley Balloon Plus Vaginal Misoprostol versus Vaginal Misoprostol Alone for Cervical Ripening in Nulliparous Obese Women: A Multicenter, Randomized, Comparative-Effectiveness Trial.
Viteri OA; Tabsh KK; Alrais MA; Salazar XC; Lopez JM; Fok RY; Chauhan SP; Sibai BM
Am J Perinatol; 2021 Aug; 38(S 01):e123-e128. PubMed ID: 32299108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Combination of Foley and prostaglandins versus Foley and oxytocin for cervical ripening: a network meta-analysis.
Orr L; Reisinger-Kindle K; Roy A; Levine L; Connolly K; Visintainer P; Schoen CN
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2020 Nov; 223(5):743.e1-743.e17. PubMed ID: 32387325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A comparison of obstetrical outcomes with labor induction agents used at term.
Aghideh FK; Mullin PM; Ingles S; Ouzounian JG; Opper N; Wilson ML; Miller DA; Lee RH
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2014 Apr; 27(6):592-6. PubMed ID: 23919802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Efficacy of dinoprostone, intracervical foleys and misoprostol in labor induction.
Saleem S
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2006 Apr; 16(4):276-9. PubMed ID: 16624192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparative efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert in labor induction at term: a randomized trial.
Ozkan S; Calişkan E; Doğer E; Yücesoy I; Ozeren S; Vural B
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2009 Jul; 280(1):19-24. PubMed ID: 19034471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prostaglandin versus mechanical dilation and the effect of maternal obesity on failure to achieve active labor: a cohort study.
Beckwith L; Magner K; Kritzer S; Warshak CR
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2017 Jul; 30(13):1621-1626. PubMed ID: 27560557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Abruptio placentae associated with misoprostol use in women with preeclampsia.
Fontenot MT; Lewis DF; Barton CB; Jones EM; Moore JA; Evans AT
J Reprod Med; 2005 Sep; 50(9):653-8. PubMed ID: 16363752
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Use of misoprostol for cervical ripening.
Katz VL; Farmer RM; Dean CA; Carpenter ME
South Med J; 2000 Sep; 93(9):881-4. PubMed ID: 11005347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Efficacy of dinoprostone and misoprostol for labor induction in nulliparous women].
Oliveira TA; Melo EM; Aquino MM; Mariani Neto C
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet; 2011 Mar; 33(3):118-22. PubMed ID: 21829994
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Efficacy and safety of six hourly vaginal misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone: a randomized controlled trial.
Denguezli W; Trimech A; Haddad A; Hajjaji A; Saidani Z; Faleh R; Sakouhi M
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2007 Aug; 276(2):119-24. PubMed ID: 17219155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Foley catheter vs prostaglandin as ripening agent in pregnant women with premature rupture of membranes.
Mackeen AD; Walker L; Ruhstaller K; Schuster M; Sciscione A
J Am Osteopath Assoc; 2014 Sep; 114(9):686-92. PubMed ID: 25170038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of prostaglandin and mechanical cervical ripening in the setting of small for gestational age neonates.
Rossi RM; Warshak CR; Masters HR; Regan JK; Kritzer SA; Magner KP
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2019 Nov; 32(22):3841-3846. PubMed ID: 29739262
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. A comparison of obstetrical outcomes and costs between misoprostol and dinoprostone for induction of labor.
Nadia Bennett K; Park H; Cioffi J; Calixte R; Vintzileos A
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2016 Nov; 29(22):3732-6. PubMed ID: 26782646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. A comparison of cervical ripening modalities among overweight and obese nulliparous gravidas.
Sarumi MA; Gherman RB; Bell TD; Jairath P; Johnson MJ; Burgess AL
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2020 Nov; 33(22):3804-3808. PubMed ID: 30810422
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. A randomized clinical trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus cervical Foley plus oral misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Hill JB; Thigpen BD; Bofill JA; Magann E; Moore LE; Martin JN
Am J Perinatol; 2009 Jan; 26(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 18850516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Cervical ripening and induction of labor with misoprostol, dinoprostone gel, and a Foley catheter: a randomized trial of 3 techniques.
Barrilleaux PS; Bofill JA; Terrone DA; Magann EF; May WL; Morrison JC
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2002 Jun; 186(6):1124-9. PubMed ID: 12066084
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A randomized comparison between misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction in patients with unfavorable cervices.
Buser D; Mora G; Arias F
Obstet Gynecol; 1997 Apr; 89(4):581-5. PubMed ID: 9083316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Safety of misoprostol for near-term and term induction in small-for-gestational-age pregnancies compared to dinoprostone and primary cesarean section: results of a retrospective cohort study.
Steetskamp J; Bachmann E; Hasenburg A; Battista MJ
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2020 Dec; 302(6):1369-1374. PubMed ID: 32761274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Efficacy and safety of misoprostol compared with the dinoprostone for labor induction at term: a meta-analysis.
Wang L; Zheng J; Wang W; Fu J; Hou L
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2016; 29(8):1297-307. PubMed ID: 26067262
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
