Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Nov 22;13(11):e19817.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.19817. eCollection 2021 Nov.

Outpatient Cervical Ripening With Misoprostol in Low-Risk Pregnancies

Kristina Roloff  1 , Kristina Nalbandyan  1 , Suzanne Cao  1 , C Camille Okekpe  1 , Inessa Dombrovsky  1 , Guillermo J Valenzuela  1
Affiliations

Outpatient Cervical Ripening With Misoprostol in Low-Risk Pregnancies

Kristina Roloff et al. Cureus. .

Abstract

Objective To determine if outpatient cervical ripening with daily misoprostol can reduce admission to delivery time in women with low-risk pregnancies at 39 or more weeks of gestation. Study design This is a retrospective cohort study of a convenience sample of low-risk pregnancies that underwent elective outpatient cervical ripening compared to matched controls for parity (nulliparous vs. parous) and gestational age. Time from admission to delivery, induction agents, presence of tachysystole, mode of delivery, length of hospitalization, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, and low Apgar scores were compared. Results Fifty-six patients who underwent outpatient cervical ripening with daily dosing of misoprostol were compared to 56 patients matched for parity and gestational weeks who underwent inpatient cervical ripening/induction of labor with misoprostol. We found the time from admission to delivery in the outpatient cervical ripening cohort was significantly lesser than the inpatient cohort (17.5 ± 11.5 hours outpatient vs. 26.6 ± 15.6 hours inpatient, P=0.001). More patients (N=18, 32%) were able to deliver within 12 hours of admission in the outpatient induction group compared to the inpatient group (N=8, 11%, P=0.010). There were no differences in frequency of cesarean delivery, uterine tachysystole with or without fetal heart rate changes, NICU admission, low Apgar scores, or low umbilical artery pH values between the two groups. Conclusion Outpatient cervical ripening with misoprostol may be a feasible alternative to inpatient cervical ripening in low-risk pregnancies, may help improve patient experience, and reduce the operational burden that elective induction confers upon labor and delivery units.

Keywords: cytotec; induction of labor; misoprostol; outpatient cervical ripening; outpatient induction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Reasons for participation or exclusion in outpatient induction.
FHR, fetal heart rate
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:513–523. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Elective induction of labor compared with expectant management of nulliparous women at 39 weeks of gestation: a randomized controlled trial. Miller NR, Cypher RL, Foglia LM, Pates JA, Nielsen PE. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:1258–1264. - PubMed
    1. Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. Grobman WA, Caughey AB. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221:304–310. - PubMed
    1. SMFM statement on elective induction of labor in low-risk nulliparous women at term: the ARRIVE trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;221:0–4. - PubMed
    1. Caughey AB, Sundaram V, Kaimal AJ, et al. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full. Vol. 2009. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2009. Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes of Elective Induction of Labor; pp. 1–257. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources