The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the pharmacokinetics of vaginal and oral administration of the prostaglandin E1 analogue, misoprostol. METHODS: Twenty women received 400-micrograms doses of misoprostol either orally or as tablets placed in the vagina. Serum levels of principal metabolite, misoprostol acid, were measured at 7.5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, and 240 minutes. The first ten women were pregnant and undergoing first-trimester abortions, and the last ten were not pregnant and had additional blood sampling at 360 minutes. We compared the pharmacokinetics of misoprostol acid after oral and vaginal administration. RESULTS: All 20 subjects completed the study. The maximum mean (+/- standard deviation [SD]) of misoprostol acid differed significantly between the oral and vaginal groups (277 +/- 124 compared with 165 +/d- 86 pg/mL, respectively; P = .03, analysis of variance), as did the mean +/- SD time to peak levels (34 +/- 17 compared with 80 +/- 27 minutes, respectively; P < .001) and areas under the misoprostol concentration versus time curve (mean +/- SD) up to 4 hours (n = 20,273.3 +/- 110.0 compared with 503.3 +/- 296.7 pg.hour/mL, respectively; P = .033) and up to 6 hours (n = 10, 300.0 +/- 103.3 compared with 956.7 +/- 541.7 pg.hour/mL, respectively; P = .029). The extent of absorption was highly variable among subjects in each group. CONCLUSION: There are significant differences in the pharmacokinetics of misoprostol administered by vaginal and oral routes that may explain the difference observed in clinical efficacy. Assuming that the pharmacologic effect of misoprostol is related to its concentration in the plasma, our observation of the prolonged serum concentrations in the vaginal group suggests that vaginal administration could be dosed at longer intervals than oral.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Pharmacokinetics of different routes of administration of misoprostol
Tang, O. S. (2002) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/17.2.332 · Cited by 490
Early Pregnancy Termination with Mifepristone and Misoprostol in the United States
Spitz, I. M., Bardin, C. W., Benton, L., & Robbins, A. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199804303381801 · Cited by 441
Prostaglandins for preventing postpartum haemorrhage
Tunçalp, Ö., Hofmeyr, G. J., & Gülmezoglu, A. M. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000494.pub4 · Cited by 296
Bagratee, J. S. (2004) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/deh049 · Cited by 165
Early intrauterine pregnancy failure: A randomized trial of medical versus surgical treatment
Muffley, P. E., Stitely, M. L., & Gherman, R. B. (2002) · American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology · doi:10.1067/mob.2002.126205 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- ZIEMAN, M., FONG, S., BENOWITZ, N., BANSKTER, D., & DARNEY, P.
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 1997-07
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 88-92
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2052243820
- Cited by
- 637
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 30.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00111-7
- The paper
- ZIEMAN, M., FONG, S., BENOWITZ, N., BANSKTER, D., & DARNEY, P. (1997). Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00111-7
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.