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 *

89 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8164948)

  • 1. Intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone as cervical ripening and labor-inducing agents.
    Sanchez-Ramos L; Kaunitz AM
    Obstet Gynecol; 1994 May; 83(5 Pt 1):799-801. PubMed ID: 8164948
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intravaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone as cervical ripening and labor-inducing agents.
    Fletcher H; Mitchell S; Frederick J; Simeon D; Brown D
    Obstet Gynecol; 1994 Feb; 83(2):244-7. PubMed ID: 8290188
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction.
    Votipka JR
    J Fam Pract; 1997 Jul; 45(1):20. PubMed ID: 9228905
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison between vaginal misoprostol and cervical dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction.
    Neiger R; Greaves PC
    Tenn Med; 2001 Jan; 94(1):25-7. PubMed ID: 11194687
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of misoprostol and prostaglandin E(2) in the preinduction and induction of labor.
    Leszczyńska-Gorzelak B; Laskowska M; Oleszczuk J
    Med Sci Monit; 2001; 7(5):1023-8. PubMed ID: 11535953
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Outpatient misoprostol compared with dinoprostone gel for preinduction cervical ripening: a randomized controlled trial.
    Meyer M; Pflum J; Howard D
    Obstet Gynecol; 2005 Mar; 105(3):466-72. PubMed ID: 15738009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. A randomised double-blind study of vaginal misoprostol vs dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labour induction in prolonged pregnancy.
    Lee HY
    Singapore Med J; 1997 Jul; 38(7):292-4. PubMed ID: 9339095
    [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. Prospective randomised controlled trial to compare safety and efficacy of intravaginal Misoprostol with intracervical Cerviprime for induction of labour with unfavourable cervix.
    Krithika KS; Aggarwal N; Suri V
    J Obstet Gynaecol; 2008 Apr; 28(3):294-7. PubMed ID: 18569471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Comparative study of misoprostol vs dinoprostone for induction of labour.
    Kulshreshtha S; Sharma P; Mohan G; Singh S; Singh S
    Indian J Physiol Pharmacol; 2007; 51(1):55-61. PubMed ID: 17877293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Comparison of intracervical and intravaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and labour induction in patients with an unfavourable cervix.
    Srisomboon J; Piyamongkol W; Aiewsakul P
    J Med Assoc Thai; 1997 Mar; 80(3):189-94. PubMed ID: 9175387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The role of prostaglandins E1 and E2, dinoprostone, and misoprostol in cervical ripening and the induction of labor: a mechanistic approach.
    Bakker R; Pierce S; Myers D
    Arch Gynecol Obstet; 2017 Aug; 296(2):167-179. PubMed ID: 28585102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Oral misoprostol vs. intravaginal prostaglandin E2 for preinduction cervical ripening. A randomized trial.
    Gherman RB; Browning J; O'Boyle A; Goodwin TM
    J Reprod Med; 2001 Jul; 46(7):641-6. PubMed ID: 11499184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Preinduction cervical ripening techniques compared.
    Greybush M; Singleton C; Atlas RO; Balducci J; Rust OA
    J Reprod Med; 2001 Jan; 46(1):11-7. PubMed ID: 11209625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Uterine hyperstimulation following cervix ripening with dinoprostone in a vaginal insert system].
    Veerman HM
    Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd; 2005 Jan; 149(2):105-6; author reply 106. PubMed ID: 15688844
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Preinduction cervical ripening. A randomized trial of intravaginal misoprostol alone vs. a combination of transcervical Foley balloon and intravaginal misoprostol.
    Rust OA; Greybush M; Atlas RO; Jones KJ; Balducci J
    J Reprod Med; 2001 Oct; 46(10):899-904. PubMed ID: 11725734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Dinoprostone compared with misoprostol for cervical ripening for induction of labor at term.
    Church S; Van Meter A; Whitfield R
    J Midwifery Womens Health; 2009; 54(5):405-411. PubMed ID: 19720343
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.