Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert: A Review in Cervical Ripening

  • Adis Drug Evaluation
  • Published:
Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dinoprostone vaginal insert (Cervidil®; Propess®), a retrievable vaginal pessary containing 10 mg of dinoprostone [prostaglandin E2 (PGE2)] in a controlled-release drug delivery device, is approved in many countries worldwide for the initiation (or continuation) of cervical ripening in patients at term prior to labour induction. The device is designed to provide a constant and sustained release of dinoprostone to the cervix to promote the complex processes involved in cervical ripening. The vaginal insert is attached to a retrieval system that facilitates easy removal of the device at the onset of labour or in the event of complications. The effectiveness of dinoprostone vaginal insert has been demonstrated in a vast range of randomized clinical trials in women at term. The agent is well tolerated, with a generally favourable safety profile, both maternal and foetal/neonatal. As with all prostaglandin agents used in cervical ripening, dinoprostone vaginal insert is associated with a risk of uterine hyperstimulation. However, this is generally rapidly reversible upon removal of the insert. The demonstrated effectiveness and safety of the device, combined with the benefits of controlled drug release from a simple, single application, and efficient dose control, suggest that dinoprostone vaginal insert is a valuable option for promoting cervical ripening in patients with an unfavourable cervix at term.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for induction of labour. 2011. http://who.int. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107: induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(2 Pt 1):386–97.

  3. Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, et al. Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(6):513–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Burnett JE Jr. Preinduction scoring: an objective approach to induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1966;28(4):479–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Leduc D, Biringer A, Lee L, et al. SOGC clinical practice guideline: induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35(9):840–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Tenore JL. Methods for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Am Fam Physician. 2003;67(10):2123–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bakker R, Pierce S, Myers D. The role of prostaglandins E1 and E2, dinoprostone, and misoprostol in cervical ripening and the induction of labor: a mechanistic approach. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;296(2):167–79.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Inducing labour: clinical guideline. 2008. http://www.nice.org.uk. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  9. Electronic Medicines Compendium. Mysodelle (misoprostol) 200 micrograms vaginal delivery system: summary of product characteristics. 2017. http://www.medicines.org.uk. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  10. US FDA. Cytotec® misoprostol tablets: US prescribing information. 2018. http://www.fda.gov. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  11. European Medicines Agency. List of nationally authorised medicinal products: misoprostol (gynaecological indication labour induction). 2018. http://www.ema.europa.eu. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  12. Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. Cervidil® (dinoprostone vaginal insert): US prescribing information. 2016. http://www.ferringusa.com. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  13. European Medicines Agency. List of nationally authorised medicinal products: dinoprostone. 2017. http://www.ema.europa.eu. Accessed 23 Aug 2018.

  14. Electronic Medicines Compendium. Propess (dinoprostone) 10 mg vaginal delivery system: summary of product characterisitics. 2017. http://www.medicines.org.uk. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  15. US FDA. Prepidil® gel (dinoprostone cervical gel): US prescribing information. 2017. http://www.fda.gov. Accessed 31 July 2018.

  16. Lyrenäs S, Clason I, Ulmsten U. In vivo controlled release of PGE2 from a vaginal insert (0.8 mm, 10 mg) during induction of labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;108(2):169–78.

  17. Goharkhay N, Stanczyk FZ, Gentzschein E, et al. Plasma prostaglandin E2 metabolite levels during labor induction with a sustained-release prostaglandin E2 vaginal insert. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 2000;7(6):338–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Goharkhay N, Stanczyk FZ, Zhang L, et al. Plasma progesterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate and estriol levels during labor induction with a sustained-release prostaglandin E2 vaginal insert. J Matern Fetal Med. 2001;10(3):197–202.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Rayburn WF, Anderson JC, Smith CV, et al. Uterine and fetal Doppler flow changes after intravaginal prostaglandin E2 therapy for cervical ripening. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;165(1):125–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Keskin HL, Kabacaoğlu G, Seçen EI, et al. Effects of intravaginally inserted controlled-release dinoprostone and oxytocin for labor induction on umbilical cord blood gas parameters. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2012;13(4):257–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rayburn WF, Wapner RJ, Barss VA, et al. An intravaginal controlled-release prostaglandin E2 pessary for cervical ripening and initiation of labor at term. Obstet Gynecol. 1992;79(3):374–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Witter FR, Mercer BM. Improved intravaginal controlled-release prostaglandin E2 insert for cervical ripening at term. J Matern Fetal Med. 1996;5(2):64–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Witter FR, Rocco LE, Johnson TRB. A randomized trial of prostaglandin E2 in a controlled-release vaginal pessary for cervical ripening at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166(3):830–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wing DA (for the Misoprostol Vaginal Insert Consortium). Misoprostol vaginal insert compared with dinoprostone vaginal insert: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(4):801–12.

  25. Wing DA, Brown R, Plante LA, et al. Misoprostol vaginal insert and time to vaginal delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122(2 Pt 1):201–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wing DA, Ortiz-Omphroy G, Paul RH. A comparison of intermittent vaginal administration of misoprostol with continuous dinoprostone for cervical ripening and labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177(3):612–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Sanchez-Ramos L, Peterson DE, Delke I, et al. Labor induction with prostaglandin E1 misoprostol compared with dinoprostone vaginal insert: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91(3):401–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Garry D, Figueroa R, Kalish RB, et al. Randomized controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal insert for labor induction. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;13(4):254–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Bolnick JM, Velazquez MD, Gonzalez JL, et al. Randomized trial between two active labor management protocols in the presence of an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190(1):124–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Rouzi AA, Alsibiani S, Mansouri N, et al. Randomized clinical trial between hourly titrated oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone for induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(1):56.e1–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang X, Yang A, Ma Q, et al. Comparative study of titrated oral misoprostol solution and vaginal dinoprostone for labor induction at term pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016;294(3):495–503.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Austin SC, Sanchez-Ramos L, Adair CD. Labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol compared with the dinoprostone vaginal insert: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(6):624.e1–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Alfirevic Z, Keeney E, Dowswell T, et al. Labour induction with prostaglandins: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;350:h217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Thomas J, Fairclough A, Kavanagh J, et al. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;19(6):CD003101.

  35. Hughes EG, Kelly AJ, Kavanagh J. Dinoprostone vaginal insert for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97(5 Pt 2):847–55.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zeng X, Zhang Y, Tian Q, et al. Efficiency of dinoprostone insert for cervical ripening and induction of labor in women of full-term pregnancy compared with dinoprostone gel: a meta-analysis. Drug Discov Ther. 2015;9(3):165–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Agosti M, et al. Is transcervical Foley catheter actually slower than prostaglandins in ripening the cervix? A randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204(4):338.e1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Edwards RK, Szychowski JM, Berger JL, et al. Foley catheter compared with the controlled-release dinoprostone insert: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(6):1280–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Cromi A, Ghezzi F, Uccella S, et al. A randomized trial of preinduction cervical ripening: dinoprostone vaginal insert versus double-balloon catheter. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(2):125.e1–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Wang H, Hong S, Liu Y, et al. Controlled-release dinoprostone insert versus Foley catheter for labor induction: a meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(14):2382–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rugarn O, Tipping D, Powers B, et al. Induction of labour with retrievable prostaglandin vaginal inserts: outcomes following retrieval due to an intrapartum adverse event. BJOG. 2017;124(5):796–803.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Pevzner L, Alfirevic Z, Powers BL, et al. Cardiotocographic abnormalities associated with misoprostol and dinoprostone cervical ripening and labor induction. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011;156(2):144–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Rath W. A clinical evaluation of controlled-release dinoprostone for cervical ripening—a review of current evidence in hospital and outpatient settings. J Perinat Med. 2005;33(6):491–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Pevzner L, Rayburn WF, Rumney P, et al. Factors predicting successful labor induction with dinoprostone and misoprostol vaginal inserts. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(2 Pt 1):261–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Hiersch L, Borovich A, Gabbay-Benziv R, et al. Can we predict successful cervical ripening with prostaglandin E2 vaginal inserts? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;295(2):343–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Edwards RK, Szychowski JM, Bodea-Braescu AV, et al. Foley catheter for induction of labor: potential barriers to adopting the technique. J Perinatol. 2015;35(12):996–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Heinemann J, Gillen G, Sanchez-Ramos L, et al. Do mechanical methods of cervical ripening increase infectious morbidity? A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(2):177–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

During the peer review process, the manufacturer of the dinoprostone vaginal insert was also offered an opportunity to review this article. Changes resulting from comments received were made on the basis of scientific and editorial merit.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Springer, Private Bag 65901, Mairangi Bay, Auckland, 0754, New Zealand

    Matt Shirley

Authors
  1. Matt Shirley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matt Shirley.

Ethics declarations

Funding

The preparation of this review was not supported by any external funding.

Conflict of interest

Matt Shirley is a salaried employee of Adis/Springer, is responsible for the article content and declares no relevant conflicts of interest.

Additional information

The manuscript was reviewed by: Ż. Kimber-Trojnar, Chair and Department of Obstetrics and Perinatology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland; A. Rouzi, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shirley, M. Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert: A Review in Cervical Ripening. Drugs 78, 1615–1624 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-018-0995-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-018-0995-2

Search

Navigation