Comparative evaluation of sublingual misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone gel for labor induction: A review of efficacy, safety, and economic considerations

Labor induction is an essential obstetric intervention employed when continuing a pregnancy poses risks to the mother or fetus. Among the pharmacological options, sublingual misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone gel are frequently utilized for their uterotonic and cervical ripening effects. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of the historical development, pharmacological mechanisms, clinical indications, safety profiles, and economic implications of both agents. Misoprostol, with its rapid action and cost-effectiveness, is well-suited for the low-resource environments; however, it has been associated with a higher incidence of maternal and neonatal side effects. Dinoprostone, while more expensive, allows for a more controlled induction process and demonstrates a favorable safety profile. Appropriate agent selection should be individualized based on patient characteristics, clinical context, and institutional capabilities.