Mifepristone Priming with Misoprostol versus Intracervical Foley’s Catheter with Misoprostol for Induction of Labour in Late Second and Third Trimester Intrauterine Fetal Death: A Prospective Comparative Study

Mifepristone priming may lead to a shorter induction-to-delivery interval and less pain compared to Foley’s catheter for labor induction in cases of IUFD beyond 24 weeks.

Summary and findings

This study compared mifepristone priming with misoprostol to intracervical Foley’s catheter with misoprostol for induction of labor in women with intrauterine fetal death beyond 24 weeks. A total of 114 women were enrolled, with 57 in each group. Mifepristone priming resulted in a shorter induction-to-delivery interval and lower misoprostol dose requirement.

Abstract

Introduction Intrauterine fetal death (IUFD) beyond 24 weeks of gestation, particularly when accompanied by an unfavourable cervix, poses a distinct obstetric challenge in achieving safe and timely vaginal delivery while minimising maternal distress. Mifepristone priming followed by misoprostol and intracervical Foley’s catheter combined with misoprostol are both established approaches for cervical ripening and induction of labour in this setting, but direct comparative data especially from Indian tertiary care populations remain limited. Methods This prospective comparative study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Kamla Raja Hospital, Gajra Raja Medical College (GRMC), Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, India, over a two-year period (November 2020–October 2022). One hundred and fourteen women with ultrasonography-confirmed IUFD beyond 24 weeks of gestation were alternately allocated to Group A (n=57; oral mifepristone 200 mg followed by gestational-age-adjusted vaginal misoprostol) or Group B (n=57; intracervical 16F Foley’s catheter followed by gestational-age-adjusted vaginal misoprostol). Outcomes assessed included pre- and post-induction Bishop score, induction-to-delivery interval, misoprostol dose requirement, need for oxytocin augmentation, mode of delivery, blood loss, maternal complications, pain (visual analogue scale, VAS), and patient satisfaction. Results Baseline age, parity, gestational age, and pre-induction Bishop score were comparable between groups (p>0.05). The mean post-induction (24-hour) Bishop score was significantly higher in Group A (7.39±2.07) than Group B (6.37±1.89; p=0.007). The mean induction-to-delivery interval was significantly shorter in Group A (25.43±6.84 hours) than Group B (29.26±5.54 hours; p=0.0014), and the median misoprostol dose requirement was significantly lower in Group A (50 mcg) than Group B (100 mcg; p<0.01). Mode of delivery, blood loss, oxytocin augmentation requirement, and overall maternal complication rates did not differ significantly between groups (all p>0.05). Pain scores were significantly lower in Group A (VAS 2.83±1.16) than Group B (VAS 6.18±1.69; p<0.0001), while patient satisfaction was comparable between groups (96.5% vs. 91.23%; p=0.244). Conclusions Both mifepristone-misoprostol and Foley’s catheter-misoprostol regimens are safe and effective methods for induction of labour following IUFD beyond 24 weeks of gestation with an unfavourable cervix. Mifepristone priming achieved a shorter induction-to-delivery interval, lower total misoprostol requirement, and substantially less procedural pain, making it an attractive first-line option where available, while Foley’s catheter remains a safe, low-cost, and widely accessible alternative, notwithstanding lower patient comfort.

Limitations

Not reported in abstract.

Elsewhere in the Oxytocin corpus