dinoprostone
Selected indexed studies
- Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert: A Review in Cervical Ripening. (Drugs, 2018) [PMID:30317521]
- Double-balloon catheter versus dinoprostone insert for labour induction: a meta-analysis. (Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2019) [PMID:30315411]
- Vaginal dinoprostone versus placebo for pain relief during intrauterine device insertion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. (Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care, 2021) [PMID:33691549]
_Worker-drafted node — pending editorial review._
Connections
dinoprostone is a side effect of
Sources
- Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert: A Review in Cervical Ripening. (2018) pubmed
- Double-balloon catheter versus dinoprostone insert for labour induction: a meta-analysis. (2019) pubmed
- Vaginal dinoprostone versus placebo for pain relief during intrauterine device insertion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. (2021) pubmed
- Controlled-release dinoprostone insert versus Foley catheter for labor induction: a meta-analysis. (2016) pubmed
- Dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. (2001) pubmed
- Intracervical Foley catheter balloon versus dinoprostone insert for induction cervical ripening: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. (2018) pubmed
- The efficacy and safety of oral and vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone on women experiencing labor: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis of 53 randomized controlled trials. (2024) pubmed
- Dinoprostone cervical gel. (1994) pubmed
- Efficacy and safety of misoprostol compared with the dinoprostone for labor induction at term: a meta-analysis. (2016) pubmed
- Comparison of dinoprostone, misoprostol and amniotomy in labor induction. (2021) pubmed