Format
Sort by

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 196

1.

A comparison of 100 microg oral misoprostol every 3 hours and 6 hours for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial.

Pongsatha S, Sirisukkasem S, Tongsong T.

J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2002 Dec;28(6):308-12.

PMID:
12512928
2.

Misoprostol for induction of labour at term: a more effective agent than dinoprostone vaginal gel.

Danielian P, Porter B, Ferri N, Summers J, Templeton A.

Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999 Aug;106(8):793-7.

PMID:
10453828
3.
4.

A comparison between single dose of 50 microg oral misoprostol and 25 microg vaginal misoprostol for labor induction.

Paisarntantiwong R, Getgan M.

J Med Assoc Thai. 2005 Oct;88 Suppl 2:S56-62.

PMID:
17722318
5.

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.

PMID:
15327448
6.

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. Erratum in: Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997 Jun;176(6):1423.

PMID:
8694043
7.

Oral and vaginal misoprostol compared with dinoprostone for induction of labor: a randomized controlled trial.

le Roux PA, Olarogun JO, Penny J, Anthony J.

Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Feb;99(2):201-5.

PMID:
11814497
8.

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. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000297313.68644.71.

PMID:
18165400
9.

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.

PMID:
11641677
10.

Sublingual misoprostol for the induction of labor at term.

Shetty A, Danielian P, Templeton A.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Jan;186(1):72-6.

PMID:
11810088
11.

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. doi: 10.1007/s00404-008-0843-9. Epub 2008 Nov 26.

PMID:
19034471
12.

Oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction: a randomized controlled trial.

Dällenbach P, Boulvain M, Viardot C, Irion O.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Jan;188(1):162-7.

PMID:
12548212
13.

Randomized trial between two active labor management protocols in the presence of an unfavorable cervix.

Bolnick JM, Velazquez MD, Gonzalez JL, Rappaport VJ, McIlwain-Dunivan G, Rayburn WF.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jan;190(1):124-8.

PMID:
14749647
14.

Safety and efficacy of oral versus vaginal misoprostol use for induction of labour at term.

Abbassi RM, Sirichand P, Rizvi S.

J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2008 Oct;18(10):625-9. doi: 10.2008/JCPSP.625629.

PMID:
18940120
15.
16.

Active management of term prelabour rupture of membranes with oral misoprostol.

Shetty A, Stewart K, Stewart G, Rice P, Danielian P, Templeton A.

BJOG. 2002 Dec;109(12):1354-8.

17.

Comparative efficacy and cost of the prostaglandin analogs dinoprostone and misoprostol as labor preinduction agents.

Ramsey PS, Harris DY, Ogburn PL Jr, Heise RH, Magtibay PM, Ramin KD.

Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Feb;188(2):560-5.

PMID:
12592272
18.

[Oral misoprostol against vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction at term: a randomized comparison].

Henrich W, Dudenhausen JW, Hanel C, Chen FC.

Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol. 2008 Oct;212(5):183-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1077027. Epub 2008 Oct 27. German.

PMID:
18956276
19.

A randomized trial comparing vaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter with concurrent oxytocin for labor induction in nulliparous women.

Culver J, Strauss RA, Brody S, Dorman K, Timlin S, McMahon MJ.

Am J Perinatol. 2004 Apr;21(3):139-46.

PMID:
15085496
20.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of titrated oral misoprostol and a conventional oral regimen for cervical ripening and labor induction.

Thaisomboon A, Russameecharoen K, Wanitpongpan P, Phattanachindakun B, Changnoi A.

Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012 Jan;116(1):13-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.07.027. Epub 2011 Sep 28.

PMID:
21959071
Items per page

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk