Díaz JGL, Malcolm SAL

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page:
PDF size: 356.97 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: in modern obstetrics, the need to increase the alternatives to overcome the constant resistance of the cervix to uterine activity is established throughout the gestational period. Preinduction with misofar was introduced in clinical practice among acceleration procedures in the maturity of the cervix.
Objective: to identify the perinatal results with the use of misofar in the pre-induction of labor for one year at the Carlos Manuel de Céspedes Hospital.
Methods: a cross-sectional descriptive observational study was carried out with 732 at the "Carlos Manuel de Céspedes" University Hospital of Bayamo, Granma province in 2018, to which one to three doses of misofar were applied as a facilitating treatment for the preinduction of the Birth.
Results: the cesarean section rate in this group of patients was around 13%. More than 50% of patients had Eutocic delivery with the 1st dose. Only 0.8% complications related to hyperstimulation of the uterus were reported, which resolved with general measures without causing morbidity in the mother or the fetus.
Conclusions: the administration of a dose of 25 μg daily for 3 days is effective to achieve cervical remodeling and move to the active phase and reaching a cervical test equal to or greater than 7, considered a criterion of success.

REFERENCES

1. Martínez Beltrán G. Factores maternos y neonatales relacionados a la asfixia perinatal en los recién nacidos del Servicio de Neonatología del hospital nacional Arzobispo Loayza en el periodo comprendido de 2013 a 2015. [Tesis]. Perú: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos; 2016. [citado 8/5/2019]. Disponible en: https://core.ac.uk/reader/323341910

2. Chiossi G, Verocchi G, Venturini P, Facchinetti F. Changes in cervical nitric oxide concentration correlate with Bishop score and cervical length modifications in prostaglandin E2-mediated induction of labor. J Soc Gynecol Investig 2006; 13(3): 203-8.

3. Nápoles Méndez D, Piloto Padrón M. Misofar® en el periparto. MEDISAN 2016; 20(7): 979-87.

4. Mishra S, Chaudhary V, Sudhir S. A study of induction of labour at term with differen prostaglandins. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences 2015; 4(45): 7785-92.

5. De León Soto JF. Misoprostol en la inducción del trabajo de parto. Revista de la Federación Centroamericana de Obstetricia y Ginecología 2016; 21(4): 99-101.

6. Calderón Cisneros E, Beltrán Montoya J, Ávila Vergara MA, Aragón Hernández JP, Caldiño Soto F, Castilla Zenteno A, et al. Protocolo clínico para inducción del trabajo de parto: propuesta de consenso. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2017; 85(5): 314-24.

7. Huaman Uscapi L. Factores asociados a inducción fallida con misoprostol, Hospital Antonio Lorena, 2018. [Tesis]. Cusco-Perú: Universidad Nacional de San Antonio Abad del Cusco; 2019. [citado 8/5/2019]. Disponible en: http://repositorio.unsaac.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/UNSAAC/4028/253T20190223_TC.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

8. Hokkila E, Kruit H, Rahkonen L, Timonen S, Mattila M, Laatio L, et al. The efficacy of misoprostol vaginal insert compared with oral misoprostol in the induction of labor of nulliparous women: a randomized national multicenter trial. Acta Obstet Ginecol Escand 2019; 98(8): 1032-39.

9. Harman Crowell EH, Crowell AM, Theiler RN. Effect of delayed misoprostol dosing interval for induction of labor: a retrospective study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth [Internet]. 2019 [citado 5/8/2019]; (309). Disponible en: https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12884-019-2454-9