Scientific article
Review
OA Policy
English

Oral misoprostol ( PGE1 ) vs vaginal dinoprostone ( PGE2 ) for labor induction: individual participant data meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

First online date2025-11-08
Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of oral misoprostol vs vaginal dinoprostone for the induction of labor (IOL) using an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis.

Methods: We used a Cochrane review and searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Emcare, CINAHL Plus, Scopus and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral misoprostol with vaginal dinoprostone for IOL in viable singleton pregnancies. We invited the authors of eligible trials to share their anonymized data. Primary outcomes were vaginal delivery, a composite measure of adverse maternal outcomes and a composite measure of adverse perinatal outcomes. IPD meta-analysis was conducted using a two-stage random-effects model. An intention-to-treat approach was used for all analyses. Aggregate-data meta-analysis was undertaken with RCTs stratified by Trustworthiness in RAndomised Clinical Trials (TRACT) score.

Results: Of 18 eligible RCTs, eight provided IPD, of which five (1892 participants) met the TRACT criteria for trustworthiness. IPD meta-analysis showed similar rates of vaginal delivery after IOL with oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone (odds ratio (OR), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.80-1.22); I2  = 0%). The rates of composite adverse perinatal outcome (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 1.02 (95% CI, 0.61-1.72); I2  = 0%) and composite adverse maternal outcome (aOR, 1.39 (95% CI, 0.72-2.69); I2  = 0%) were also comparable between the groups. Of 10 RCTs that did not share IPD, seven met the TRACT criteria. Aggregate-data meta-analysis of the 12 RCTs (five with IPD and seven without IPD) meeting the trustworthiness criteria also showed comparable rates of vaginal delivery after oral misoprostol and after vaginal dinoprostone (OR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.92-1.27)). In contrast, six studies not meeting the trustworthiness criteria (three with and three without IPD) reported a higher rate of vaginal delivery following oral misoprostol (OR, 1.34 (95% CI, 1.22-1.48)), resulting in an inflated overall estimate of the vaginal delivery rate after oral misoprostol based on all data (OR, 1.19 (95% CI, 1.05-1.36)).

Conclusion: IOL with oral misoprostol or vaginal dinoprostone results in comparable rates of vaginal delivery and composite perinatal and maternal adverse outcomes. © 2025 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Keywords
  • PGE1
  • PGE2
  • Dinoprostone
  • Individual participant data
  • Induction of labor
  • Misoprostol
  • Safety
  • Systematic review
  • Vaginal delivery
Funding
  • National Health and Medical Research Council [GNT1176437]
Citation (ISO format)
TAN, S Y et al. Oral misoprostol ( PGE1 ) vs vaginal dinoprostone ( PGE2 ) for labor induction: individual participant data meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials. In: Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology, 2025. doi: 10.1002/uog.70100
Main files (1)
Article (Published version)
Identifiers
Journal ISSN0960-7692
10views
262downloads

Technical informations

Creation11/11/2025 14:21:40
First validation22/12/2025 16:18:43
Update22/12/2025 16:18:43
Status update22/12/2025 16:18:43
Last indexation22/12/2025 16:18:44
All rights reserved by Archive ouverte UNIGE and the University of GenevaunigeBlack