A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy

Objective: To compare the efficacy of a nitric oxide donor (isosorbide mononitrate) and a prostaglandin E1 analogue (misoprostol) for cervical priming before hysteroscopy. Design: Comparative clinical trial. Methods: A total of 162 patients with diagnosed intrauterine lesions scheduled for hysterosc...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Waleed El-Khayat, Ahmed Maged, Hassan Omar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2010-10-01
Series:Middle East Fertility Society Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110569010000907
_version_ 1818449574992281600
author Waleed El-Khayat
Ahmed Maged
Hassan Omar
author_facet Waleed El-Khayat
Ahmed Maged
Hassan Omar
author_sort Waleed El-Khayat
collection DOAJ
description Objective: To compare the efficacy of a nitric oxide donor (isosorbide mononitrate) and a prostaglandin E1 analogue (misoprostol) for cervical priming before hysteroscopy. Design: Comparative clinical trial. Methods: A total of 162 patients with diagnosed intrauterine lesions scheduled for hysteroscopy were allocated to two groups: in group A patients (n=81) IMN 40mg was inserted into the posterior fornix of the vagina while misoprostol 200μg was inserted into the posterior fornix of the vagina in group B patients (n=81). Results: There was no significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to the duration of application or difficult dilatation. In contrast, there was a significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to baseline cervical dilatation (5mm for IMN and 8mm for misoprostol) and duration of dilatation (73s for IMN and 49s for misoprostol). There was no significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to nausea, vomiting and hot flushes. In contrast, there was a significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to abdominal pain (17 cases for IMN and 55 cases for misoprostol) and headache (65 cases for IMN and 9 cases for misoprostol). Conclusion: Misoprostol is superior to isosorbide mononitrate regarding better baseline cervical dilatation, less duration of dilatation, less incidence cervical injury and finally better feasibility of the procedure.
first_indexed 2024-12-14T20:37:35Z
format Article
id doaj.art-88c15adfb4c540158fcd14ae77d512c5
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1110-5690
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-14T20:37:35Z
publishDate 2010-10-01
publisher SpringerOpen
record_format Article
series Middle East Fertility Society Journal
spelling doaj.art-88c15adfb4c540158fcd14ae77d512c52022-12-21T22:48:21ZengSpringerOpenMiddle East Fertility Society Journal1110-56902010-10-0115427828010.1016/j.mefs.2010.07.007A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopyWaleed El-KhayatAhmed MagedHassan OmarObjective: To compare the efficacy of a nitric oxide donor (isosorbide mononitrate) and a prostaglandin E1 analogue (misoprostol) for cervical priming before hysteroscopy. Design: Comparative clinical trial. Methods: A total of 162 patients with diagnosed intrauterine lesions scheduled for hysteroscopy were allocated to two groups: in group A patients (n=81) IMN 40mg was inserted into the posterior fornix of the vagina while misoprostol 200μg was inserted into the posterior fornix of the vagina in group B patients (n=81). Results: There was no significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to the duration of application or difficult dilatation. In contrast, there was a significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to baseline cervical dilatation (5mm for IMN and 8mm for misoprostol) and duration of dilatation (73s for IMN and 49s for misoprostol). There was no significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to nausea, vomiting and hot flushes. In contrast, there was a significant difference between IMN and misoprostol with regard to abdominal pain (17 cases for IMN and 55 cases for misoprostol) and headache (65 cases for IMN and 9 cases for misoprostol). Conclusion: Misoprostol is superior to isosorbide mononitrate regarding better baseline cervical dilatation, less duration of dilatation, less incidence cervical injury and finally better feasibility of the procedure.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110569010000907HysteroscopyIMNMisoprostol
spellingShingle Waleed El-Khayat
Ahmed Maged
Hassan Omar
A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
Middle East Fertility Society Journal
Hysteroscopy
IMN
Misoprostol
title A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
title_full A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
title_fullStr A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
title_full_unstemmed A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
title_short A comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate (IMN) versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
title_sort comparative study between isosorbide mononitrate imn versus misoprostol prior to hysteroscopy
topic Hysteroscopy
IMN
Misoprostol
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110569010000907
work_keys_str_mv AT waleedelkhayat acomparativestudybetweenisosorbidemononitrateimnversusmisoprostolpriortohysteroscopy
AT ahmedmaged acomparativestudybetweenisosorbidemononitrateimnversusmisoprostolpriortohysteroscopy
AT hassanomar acomparativestudybetweenisosorbidemononitrateimnversusmisoprostolpriortohysteroscopy
AT waleedelkhayat comparativestudybetweenisosorbidemononitrateimnversusmisoprostolpriortohysteroscopy
AT ahmedmaged comparativestudybetweenisosorbidemononitrateimnversusmisoprostolpriortohysteroscopy
AT hassanomar comparativestudybetweenisosorbidemononitrateimnversusmisoprostolpriortohysteroscopy