427 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25305762)
1. Comparison of 25 µg sublingual and 50 µg intravaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor: a randomized controlled equivalence trial.
Sharami SH; Milani F; Faraji R; Bloukimoghadam K; Salamat F; Momenzadeh S; Ebrahimi H
Arch Iran Med; 2014 Oct; 17(10):652-6. PubMed ID: 25305762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparison of various routes and dosages of misoprostol for cervical ripening and the induction of labor.
How HY; Leaseburge L; Khoury JC; Siddiqi TA; Spinnato JA; Sibai BM
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Oct; 185(4):911-5. PubMed ID: 11641677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a randomized prospective placebo-controlled study.
Zahran KM; Shahin AY; Abdellah MS; Elsayh KI
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2009 Dec; 35(6):1054-60. PubMed ID: 20144171
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison between vaginal and sublingual misoprostol 50 µg for cervical ripening prior to induction of labor: randomized clinical trial.
Conde A; Ben S; Tarigo J; Artucio S; Varela V; Grimaldi P; Sosa C; Alonso J
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2017 Apr; 295(4):839-844. PubMed ID: 28204882
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Misoprostol 50 microg sublingually versus vaginally for labor induction at term: a randomized study.
Caliskan E; Bodur H; Ozeren S; Corakci A; Ozkan S; Yucesoy I
Gynecol Obstet Invest; 2005; 59(3):155-61. PubMed ID: 15640607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Intravaginal Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction in Nulliparous Women: A Double-blinded, Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.
Zhang Y; Zhu HP; Fan JX; Yu H; Sun LZ; Chen L; Chang Q; Zhao NQ; Di W
Chin Med J (Engl); 2015 Oct; 128(20):2736-42. PubMed ID: 26481739
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Sublingual misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized clinical trial.
Wolf SB; Sanchez-Ramos L; Kaunitz AM
Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Feb; 105(2):365-71. PubMed ID: 15684166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.
Fisher SA; Mackenzie VP; Davies GA
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Oct; 185(4):906-10. PubMed ID: 11641676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Labor induction with randomized comparison of cervical, oral and intravaginal misoprostol.
Dadashaliha M; Fallah S; Mirzadeh M
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2021 Oct; 21(1):721. PubMed ID: 34706675
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Sublingual compared with vaginal misoprostol for labour induction at term: a randomised controlled trial.
Bartusevicius A; Barcaite E; Krikstolaitis R; Gintautas V; Nadisauskiene R
BJOG; 2006 Dec; 113(12):1431-7. PubMed ID: 17083652
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Comparative study of the effect of intravaginal misoprostol at 50 and 100 micrograms in cervical ripening and labor induction].
Reyna-Villasmil E; Guerra-Velásquez M; Torres-Montilla M; Reyna-Villasmil N; Mejia-Montilla J; Labarca-Vincero N
Invest Clin; 2005 Jun; 46(2):179-86. PubMed ID: 16001749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Labor induction post-term with 25 micrograms vs. 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol.
Meydanli MM; Calişkan E; Burak F; Narin MA; Atmaca R
Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2003 Jun; 81(3):249-55. PubMed ID: 12767565
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor at term: a randomized controlled trial.
Paungmora N; Herabutya Y; O-Prasertsawat P; Punyavachira P
J Obstet Gynaecol Res; 2004 Oct; 30(5):358-62. PubMed ID: 15327448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Intravaginal administration of isosorbide mononitrate and misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour: a randomized controlled trial.
Abdellah MS; Hussien M; Aboalhassan A
Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2011 Jul; 284(1):25-30. PubMed ID: 20582425
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Titrated oral compared with vaginal misoprostol for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial.
Cheng SY; Ming H; Lee JC
Obstet Gynecol; 2008 Jan; 111(1):119-25. PubMed ID: 18165400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prospective randomized clinical trial of inpatient cervical ripening with stepwise oral misoprostol vs vaginal misoprostol.
Colón I; Clawson K; Hunter K; Druzin ML; Taslimi MM
Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Mar; 192(3):747-52. PubMed ID: 15746667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Effectiveness and safety of a new vaginal misoprostol product specifically labeled for cervical ripening and labor induction.
Cecatti JG; Tedesco RP; Pires HM; Calderon IM; Faúndes A
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2006; 85(6):706-11. PubMed ID: 16752263
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Pre-induction cervical ripening: transcervical foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol.
Adeniji OA; Oladokun A; Olayemi O; Adeniji OI; Odukogbe AA; Ogunbode O; Aimakhu CO; Omigbodun AO; Ilesanmi AO
J Obstet Gynaecol; 2005 Feb; 25(2):134-9. PubMed ID: 15814391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
