2024-09-042024-09-042009-03-012149-9322https://hdl.handle.net/11452/44307Objective: Our aim that compare the efficacy and safety of vaginal misoprostol with vaginal dinoprostone in term labor induction and cervical ripening.Material and method: The patients included in the study had medical or obstetric indication for induction of labor, had reached a gestational age of at least 37 weeks, had unfavourable bishop score and 61 alive singleton pregnancies in cephalic presentation. 50 proportional to g misoprostol, at every 4 hours, maximum 4 doses were applied to one group and; 0.5 mg dinoprostone, at every 12 hours, maximum 2 doses were applied to the other group. The data were analyzed statistically by Chi square test and Fisher's exact test when applicable.Results: Intervals from application of initial dose to delivery time were 13 +/- 1,51 hours and 13,8 +/- 1,75 hours for the dinoprostone and misoprostol groups, respectively (p= 0.724). More women in dinoprostone group were given birth vaginally within 24 hours, but this was not statistically significant(% 74.1 vs % 57.1, p=0.187). Induction agent dose, oxytocin augmentation requirement, mode of deliveries and neonatal outcomes were not significantly different between two groups.Conclusion: Vaginal misoprostol has similar efficacy and safety as vaginal dinoprostone. One may be an alternative to the other in cervical ripening and labor induction. Misopristol, due to cost effectiveness can be prefered.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessCervical ripeningDinoprostoneLabor inductionMisoprostolScience & technologyLife sciences & biomedicineObstetrics & gynecologyArticle000422493100004273461