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.
179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31188317)
41. Randomized comparison between intravaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Nunes F; Rodrigues R; Meirinho M Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1999 Sep; 181(3):626-9. PubMed ID: 10486474 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
43. 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]
44. Vaginal assessment and expedited amniotomy in oral misoprostol labor induction in nulliparas: a randomized trial. Win ST; Tan PC; Balchin I; Khong SY; Si Lay K; Omar SZ Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2019 Apr; 220(4):387.e1-387.e12. PubMed ID: 30633917 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
45. A randomized comparison of oral and intravaginal misoprostol for labor induction. Wing DA; Park MR; Paul RH Obstet Gynecol; 2000 Jun; 95(6 Pt 1):905-8. PubMed ID: 10831989 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
46. 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]
47. A comparison of misoprostol vaginal insert and misoprostol vaginal tablets for induction of labor in nulliparous women: a retrospective cohort study. Marsdal KE; Sørbye IK; Gaudernack LC; Lukasse M BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2018 Jan; 18(1):11. PubMed ID: 29304769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
48. Labor induction with prostaglandin E1 misoprostol compared with dinoprostone vaginal insert: a randomized trial. Sanchez-Ramos L; Peterson DE; Delke I; Gaudier FL; Kaunitz AM Obstet Gynecol; 1998 Mar; 91(3):401-5. PubMed ID: 9491868 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
49. Short stature and vaginal dinoprostone as independent predictors of composite maternal-newborn adverse outcomes in induction of labor after one previous cesarean: a retrospective cohort study. Tan SP; Bashirudin SB; Rajaratnam RK; Gan F BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2024 Jul; 24(1):455. PubMed ID: 38951754 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
50. [Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: CNGOF Guidelines for Clinical Practice - Methods for Inducing Labor]. Girault A Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol; 2020 Jan; 48(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 31669528 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
51. 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]
52. 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]
53. Randomized comparison of misoprostol and dinoprostone for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Chang CH; Chang FM J Formos Med Assoc; 1997 May; 96(5):366-9. PubMed ID: 9170825 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
54. Oral misoprostol vs. vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction. Adam I; Hassan OA; Elhassan EM Int J Gynaecol Obstet; 2005 May; 89(2):142-3. PubMed ID: 15847879 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
55. 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]
56. A randomized trial of misoprostol versus extra-amniotic sodium chloride infusion with oxytocin for induction of labor. Buccellato CA; Stika CS; Frederiksen MC Am J Obstet Gynecol; 2000 May; 182(5):1039-44. PubMed ID: 10819821 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
57. A comparison of differing dosing regimens of vaginally administered misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening and labor induction. Wing DA; Paul RH Am J Obstet Gynecol; 1996 Jul; 175(1):158-64. PubMed ID: 8694043 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
58. 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]
59. Randomized study of vaginal misoprostol (PGE(1)) and dinoprostone gel (PGE(2)) for induction of labor at term. Pandis GK; Papageorghiou AT; Otigbah CM; Howard RJ; Nicolaides KH Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol; 2001 Dec; 18(6):629-35. PubMed ID: 11844203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
60. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of two different doses of misoprostol suppositories with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Khoury AN; Zhou QP; Gorenberg DM; Nies BM; Manley GE; Mecklenburg FE J Matern Fetal Med; 2001 Jun; 10(3):186-92. PubMed ID: 11444788 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Previous] [Next] [New Search]