A comparison between labor induction with only Dilapan-S and a combination of mifepristone and Dilapan-S in nulliparous women: a prospective pilot study

Abstract Objective The aim of our study was to determine whether the combination of mifepristone and the osmotic dilator Dilapan-S improves the labor induction outcomes as compared to Dilapan-S alone. Methods This prospective comparative study included 127 eligible women, of whom 58 underwent cervical ripening with Dilapan-S (12-h exposure, the control group) and 69 with Dilapan-S, with a concurrent pretreatment of 200 mg oral mifepristone (the study group), 8 h before Dilapan-S insertion. Results The vaginal delivery rate in the control group and the study group was 60.3 and 76.8% (p = .045), respectively; the induction to delivery interval was 22.74 ± 3.01 h and 19,890 ± 2.42 h (p < .001), respectively; and the number of births within 24 h was 43.1 and 73.9% (p < .001), respectively. There was no difference in the rate of failed labor induction (6.9 versus 8.7%, p = .939). The Bishop’s score improved significantly after the combined treatment as compared to with Dilapan alone (3.10 ± 0.58 versus 4.03 ± 1.35, p < .001). Moreover, in the study group, labor started earlier and proceeded faster with a lower additional oxytocin usage for labor induction or augmentation. There were no differences in the operative delivery rate and the perinatal outcomes. There were no adverse side effects of both mifepristone and Dilapan-S. Conclusion Our study is the first one to show that in comparison to labor induction using only osmotic dilators Dilapan-S, the combination of mifepristone and Dilapan-S is more efficient in terms of improving cervical ripening and vaginal delivery rate and reducing labor duration and frequency of oxytocin augmentation. The results revealed that this combined method is safe and has no immediate adverse effects on newborns. More studies are needed to evaluate what clinical cases are the most appropriate for the application of this combined method, considering the parity, degree of cervical ripening, and indication for labor induction.

[1]  G. Saade,et al.  A randomized controlled trial of Dilapan‐S vs Foley balloon for preinduction cervical ripening (DILAFOL trial) , 2019, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[2]  K. Kagan,et al.  Dosing interval between mifepristone and misoprostol in second and third trimester termination , 2019, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[3]  L. Hruban,et al.  Synthetic osmotic dilators in the induction of labour-An international multicentre observational study. , 2018, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[4]  W. Rath,et al.  Induction of labor in patients with an unfavorable cervix after a cesarean using an osmotic dilator versus vaginal prostaglandin , 2018, Journal of perinatal medicine.

[5]  F. Mcauliffe,et al.  A prospective pilot study of Dilapan-S compared with Propess for induction of labour at 41+ weeks in nulliparous pregnancy , 2018, Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -).

[6]  P. Blumenthal,et al.  Preoperative effects of mifepristone for dilation and evacuation after 19 weeks of gestation: a randomised controlled trial , 2017, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[7]  G. Sukhikh,et al.  Outcomes of mifepristone usage for cervical ripening and induction of labour in full-term pregnancy. Randomized controlled trial. , 2017, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology.

[8]  Z. Alfirevic,et al.  Pharmacological and mechanical interventions for labour induction in outpatient settings. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[9]  A. Verma,et al.  Mifepristone vs balloon catheter for labor induction in previous cesarean: a randomized controlled trial , 2017, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[10]  P. Soni,et al.  A Retrospective Case–Control Study Evaluating the Role of Mifepristone for Induction of Labor in Women with Previous Cesarean Section , 2016, The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India.

[11]  P. Chaudhuri,et al.  Mifepristone and misoprostol compared with misoprostol alone for induction of labor in intrauterine fetal death: A randomized trial , 2015, The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research.

[12]  G. Fitzmaurice,et al.  Cervical Preparation Before Dilation and Evacuation Using Adjunctive Misoprostol or Mifepristone Compared With Overnight Osmotic Dilators Alone: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2015, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  P. Blumenthal,et al.  Adjunct mifepristone for cervical preparation prior to dilation and evacuation: a randomized trial. , 2015, Contraception.

[14]  M. Dudič,et al.  Experimental comparison of properties of natural and synthetic osmotic dilators , 2015, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[15]  S. Deshpande,et al.  Safety and Efficacy of Oral Mifepristone in Pre-induction Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labour in Prolonged Pregnancy , 2015, The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India.

[16]  S. Panda,et al.  Role of Combination OF Mifepristone and Misoprostol Verses Misoprostol alone in Induction of Labour in Late Intrauterin Fetal Death: A Prospective Study , 2013, Journal of family & reproductive health.

[17]  G. Siva Praveena,et al.  Mifepristone in the induction of labour at term , 2013 .

[18]  Neema S Acharya,et al.  Effect of mifepristone in cervical ripening for induction of labour , 2013 .

[19]  E. Chien,et al.  Mifepristone-induced cervical ripening: structural, biomechanical, and molecular events. , 2006, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[20]  R. Sitruk-Ware,et al.  Pharmacological properties of mifepristone: toxicology and safety in animal and human studies. , 2003, Contraception.

[21]  J. Neilson.  Mifepristone for induction of labour. , 2000, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[22]  M. Bygdeman,et al.  The effect of the antiprogestin RU 486 on uterine contractility and sensitivity to prostaglandin and oxytocin , 1988, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.