These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

134 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25666004)

  • 1. Comparison of 25 and 50 microgram of misoprostol for induction of labour in nulliparous women with postdate pregnancy in Port Harcourt.
    Azubuike IJ; Bassey G; Okpani A
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2015; 18(2):263-7. PubMed ID: 25666004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Misoprostol administered sublingually at a dose of 12.5 μg versus vaginally at a dose of 25 μg for the induction of full-term labor: a randomized controlled trial protocol.
    Gattás DSMB; da Silva Junior JR; Souza ASR; Feitosa FE; de Amorim MMR
    Reprod Health; 2018 Apr; 15(1):65. PubMed ID: 29669596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The efficacy of misoprostol vaginal insert compared with oral misoprostol in the induction of labor of nulliparous women: A randomized national multicenter trial.
    Hokkila E; Kruit H; Rahkonen L; Timonen S; Mattila M; Laatio L; Ordén MR; Uotila J; Luukkaala T; Tihtonen K
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2019 Aug; 98(8):1032-1039. PubMed ID: 30771243
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Misoprostol compared with prostaglandin E2 for labour induction in women at term with intact membranes and unfavourable cervix: a systematic review.
    Crane JM; Butler B; Young DC; Hannah ME
    BJOG; 2006 Dec; 113(12):1366-76. PubMed ID: 17081181
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Randomization of two dosing regimens of vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction in a low resource setting.
    Adeniyi AA; Odukogbe AA; Olayemi A; Oladokun O; Adeniji AO; Aimakhu CO; Enakpene C
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2014; 17(3):287-91. PubMed ID: 24714004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Misoprostol administered sublingually at a dose of 12.5 μg versus vaginally at a dose of 25 μg for the induction of full-term labor: a randomized controlled trial.
    Gattás DSMB; de Amorim MMR; Feitosa FEL; da Silva-Junior JR; Ribeiro LCG; Souza GFA; Souza ASR
    Reprod Health; 2020 Apr; 17(1):47. PubMed ID: 32272959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Induction of labour in nulliparous women- quick or slow: a cohort study comparing slow-release vaginal insert with low-dose misoprostol oral tablets.
    Eriksson A; Jeppesen S; Krebs L
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2020 Feb; 20(1):79. PubMed ID: 32033600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Balancing the efficacy and safety of misoprostol: a meta-analysis comparing 25 versus 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour.
    McMaster K; Sanchez-Ramos L; Kaunitz AM
    BJOG; 2015 Mar; 122(4):468-76. PubMed ID: 24989790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Efficacy of sublingual misoprostol for induction of labor at term and post term according to parity and membrane integrity: a prospective observational study.
    Brusati V; Brembilla G; Cirillo F; Mastricci L; Rossi S; Paganelli AM; Ferrazzi E
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2017 Mar; 30(5):508-513. PubMed ID: 27321698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Induction of labor in prolonged pregnancy with unfavorable cervix: comparison of sequential intracervical Foley catheter-intravaginal misoprostol and intravaginal misoprostol alone.
    Ande AB; Ezeanochie CM; Olagbuji NB
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2012 Apr; 285(4):967-71. PubMed ID: 22012248
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Induction to delivery interval using transcervical Foley catheter plus oxytocin and vaginal misoprostol: A comparative study at Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria.
    Garba I; Muhammed AS; Muhammad Z; Galadanci HS; Ayyuba R; Abubakar IS
    Ann Afr Med; 2016; 15(3):114-9. PubMed ID: 27549415
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A comparison of oral and vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a randomised trial.
    Kwon JS; Davies GA; Mackenzie VP
    BJOG; 2001 Jan; 108(1):23-6. PubMed ID: 11212999
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Comparative study of the outcome of induction of labor using 25 µg and 50 µg of vaginal misoprostol.
    Loto OM; Ikuomola AA; Ayuba II; Onwudiegwu U
    J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med; 2012 Nov; 25(11):2359-62. PubMed ID: 22640229
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for labour induction.
    Rasheed R; Alam AA; Younus S; Raza F
    J Pak Med Assoc; 2007 Aug; 57(8):404-7. PubMed ID: 17902524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study.
    Schmidt M; Neophytou M; Hars O; Freudenberg J; Kühnert M
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2019 Jan; 299(1):105-112. PubMed ID: 30374645
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for induction of labor in Enugu, Nigeria: a randomized controlled trial.
    Ezechukwu PC; Ugwu EO; Obi SN; Chigbu CO
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2015 Mar; 291(3):537-44. PubMed ID: 25138128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.