Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,100Open textbooks2Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology107Genetics and Genomics95Neuroscience110Cardiovascular Medicine105Immunology90Pharmacology99Molecular Biology100Infectious Diseases102Rare and Inherited Diseases106Clinical Research98Anatomy and Physiology542Drugs and Chemicals546
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Drugs and Chemicals›Misoprostol
Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Misoprostol

Drugs and Chemicals · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-10-31 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 5 min read

A synthetic analog of natural prostaglandin E1.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (883 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

A synthetic analog of natural prostaglandin E1. It produces a dose-related inhibition of gastric acid and pepsin secretion, and enhances mucosal resistance to injury. It is an effective anti-ulcer agent and also has oxytocic properties.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: SC-30249; SC30249; SC 30249; Cytotec; Misoprostol, (11beta,13E)-(+-)-Isomer; Misoprostol, (11alpha,13Z)-(+-)-Isomer; Misoprostol, (11alpha,13E,16R)-Isomer; Misoprostol, (11alpha.13E,16S)-Isomer.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Prostaglandins E, Synthetic

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 4,941 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Misoprostol” (counts retrieved 2026-10-31). 839 of them (17.0%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2000-2009 with 1,543 records.

Reviews account for 703 records (14.2%) and meta-analyses for 174. Randomized controlled trials number 1,297 (26.2%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up a comparatively large share of this literature, which means many treatment questions have been tested directly.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 1,125 records; 2000-2009: 1,543 records; 2010-2019: 1,434 records; 2020 onward: 839 records1,125through 19991,5432000-20091,4342010-20198392020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19991,125
2000-20091,543
2010-20191,434
2020 onward839
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 14.2 percent; Meta-analyses: 3.5 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 26.2 percentReviews14.2% (703)Meta-analyses3.5% (174)Randomized controlled trials26.2% (1,297)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 4,941 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews70314.2%
Meta-analyses1743.5%
Randomized controlled trials1,29726.2%

Method: PubMed query "Misoprostol"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-31.

Reading the evidence in drugs and chemicals

Studies of a chemical or drug can answer very different questions: what it is and how it behaves in cells and animals, how the body handles it, and whether it changes outcomes in people. Laboratory and animal findings often do not carry over to patients, and observational studies of exposures are confounded by who uses a substance and why. Nothing on this page is a recommendation to use, avoid, start or stop any substance or medicine; talk to a qualified clinician or pharmacist about your own situation. Check the dose, the species, the comparison group and whether a patient-relevant outcome was measured.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Self-managed medication abortion outcomes: results from a prospective pilot study
Moseson H, Jayaweera R, Raifman S, Keefe-Oates B, Filippa S, Motana R, et al.
2020Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
53cc by
PMID 33109230 · DOI · PMC7588945
Misoprostol for medical treatment of missed abortion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Wu HL, Marwah S, Wang P, Wang QM, Chen XW
2017Systematic review
Design not recorded in structured metadata
53cc by
PMID 28490770 · DOI · PMC5431938
Effectiveness and safety of telehealth medication abortion in the USA
Upadhyay UD, Koenig LR, Meckstroth K, Ko J, Valladares ES, Biggs MA
2024Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
49cc by
PMID 38361123 · DOI · PMC11031403
Comparison between kinesiotherapy and usual care during the first stage of labour in misoprostol-induced pregnant women: randomised clinical trial
Almeida MO, Delgado A, da Silva RCB, Alves FC, Cabral NO, da Paz MMS, et al.
2025Randomized controlled trial
Design not recorded in structured metadata
0cc by
PMID 41341928 · DOI · PMC12671676

Self-managed medication abortion outcomes: results from a prospective pilot study [1]

Research article Moseson H, Jayaweera R, Raifman S, Keefe-Oates B, Filippa S, Motana R, et al. · · 2020 · cited 53 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundTo evaluate the feasibility of conducting a prospective study to measure self-managed medication abortion outcomes, and to collect preliminary data on safety and effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion, we recruited callers to accompaniment groups (volunteer networks that provide counselling through the out-of-clinic medication abortion process by trained counselors over the phone or in-person).
Closing excerpt
Trial registration ISRCTN95769543.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (276 words)

BackgroundTo evaluate the feasibility of conducting a prospective study to measure self-managed medication abortion outcomes, and to collect preliminary data on safety and effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion, we recruited callers to accompaniment groups (volunteer networks that provide counselling through the out-of-clinic medication abortion process by trained counselors over the phone or in-person).MethodsIn 2019, we enrolled callers to three abortion accompaniment groups in three countries into a prospective study on the safety and effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion with accompaniment support. Participants completed up to five interview-administered questionnaires from baseline through 6-weeks after taking the pills. Primary outcomes included: (1) the number of participants enrolled in a 30-day period, (2) the proportion that had a complete abortion; and (3) the proportion who experienced any warning signs of potential or actual complications.ResultsOver the 30-day recruitment period, we enrolled 227 participants (95% of those invited), and retained 204 participants (90%) for at least one study follow-up visit. At the 1-week follow-up, two participants (1%) reported a miscarriage prior to taking the pills, and 202 participants (89% of those enrolled and 99% of those who participated in the 1-week survey) had obtained and taken the medications. Three weeks after taking the medications, 192 (95%) participants reported feeling that their abortion was complete. Three (1.5%) received a surgical intervention, two (1%) received antibiotics, and five (3%) received other medications. Participants did not report any major adverse events.ConclusionThese results establish the feasibility of conducting prospective studies of self-managed medication abortion in legally restrictive settings. Further, the high effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion with accompaniment support reported here is consistent with high levels of effectiveness reported in prior studies. Trial registration ISRCTN95769543.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33109230 · DOI · PMC7588945

Misoprostol for medical treatment of missed abortion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis [2]

Systematic review Wu HL, Marwah S, Wang P, Wang QM, Chen XW · · 2017 · cited 53 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
The efficacy and safety of misoprostol alone for missed abortion varied with different regimens.
Closing excerpt
The ideal dose and medication interval of misoprostol however needs to be further researched.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (208 words)

The efficacy and safety of misoprostol alone for missed abortion varied with different regimens. To evaluate existing evidence for the medical management of missed abortion using misoprostol, we undertook a comprehensive review and meta-analysis. The electronic literature search was conducted using PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, EBSCOhost Online Research Databases, Springer Link, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Ovid Medline and Google Scholar. 18 studies of 1802 participants were included in our analysis. Compared with vaginal misoprostol of 800 ug or sublingual misoprostol of 600 ug, lower-dose regimens (200 ug or 400 ug) by any route of administration tend to be significantly less effective in producing abortion within about 24 hours. In terms of efficacy, the most effective treatment was sublingual misoprostol of 600 ug and the least effective was oral misoprostol of 400 ug. In terms of tolerability, vaginal misoprostol of 400 ug was reported with fewer side effects and sublingual misoprostol of 600 ug was reported with more side effects. Misoprostol is a non-invasive, effective medical method for completion of abortion in missed abortion. Sublingual misoprostol of 600 ug or vaginal misoprostol of 800 ug may be a good choice for the first dose. The ideal dose and medication interval of misoprostol however needs to be further researched.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 28490770 · DOI · PMC5431938

Effectiveness and safety of telehealth medication abortion in the USA [3]

Research article Upadhyay UD, Koenig LR, Meckstroth K, Ko J, Valladares ES, Biggs MA · · 2024 · cited 49 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Telehealth abortion has become critical to addressing surges in demand in states where abortion remains legal but evidence on its effectiveness and safety is limited.
Closing excerpt
Telehealth medication abortion is effective, safe and comparable to published rates of in-person medication abortion care.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (218 words)

Telehealth abortion has become critical to addressing surges in demand in states where abortion remains legal but evidence on its effectiveness and safety is limited. California Home Abortion by Telehealth (CHAT) is a prospective study that follows pregnant people who obtained medication abortion via telehealth from three virtual clinics operating in 20 states and Washington, DC between April 2021 and January 2022. Individuals were screened using a standardized no-test protocol, primarily relying on their medical history to assess medical eligibility. We assessed effectiveness, defined as complete abortion after 200 mg mifepristone and 1,600 μg misoprostol (or lower) without additional intervention; safety was measured by the absence of serious adverse events. We estimated rates using multivariable logistic regression and multiple imputation to account for missing data. Among 6,034 abortions, 97.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 97.2-98.1%) were complete without subsequent known intervention or ongoing pregnancy after the initial treatment. Overall, 99.8% (99.6-99.9%) of abortions were not followed by serious adverse events. In total, 0.25% of patients experienced a serious abortion-related adverse event, 0.16% were treated for an ectopic pregnancy and 1.3% abortions were followed by emergency department visits. There were no differences in effectiveness or safety between synchronous and asynchronous models of care. Telehealth medication abortion is effective, safe and comparable to published rates of in-person medication abortion care.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 38361123 · DOI · PMC11031403

Comparison between kinesiotherapy and usual care during the first stage of labour in misoprostol-induced pregnant women: randomised clinical trial [4]

Randomized controlled trial Almeida MO, Delgado A, da Silva RCB, Alves FC, Cabral NO, da Paz MMS, et al. · · 2025

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
ObjectiveTo analyse the effectiveness of kinesiotherapy in the labour of pregnant women induced by misoprostol.
Closing excerpt
Brazilian registry of clinical trials rebecRBR-3mvj4m7.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (181 words)

ObjectiveTo analyse the effectiveness of kinesiotherapy in the labour of pregnant women induced by misoprostol.MethodsThis is a clinical trial carried out with pregnant women pharmacologically induced by misoprostol (25mcg, vaginally). They were randomised into two groups: Intervention Group (IG) of induced pregnant women who underwent kinesiotherapy during the active phase of labour; and Control Group (CG), of induced pregnant women who did not do physical therapy during the active phase of labour. Among the variables studied were vaginal delivery, induction time, duration of the labour, and the number of misoprostol doses. Data were analysed by the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The IG had more vaginal deliveries (p=0.016). The other variables analysed showed no difference between groups.ResultsKinesiotherapy during the active phase of labour in women induced by misoprostol was effective for performing more vaginal deliveries despite not showing any difference in the other outcomes studied.ConclusionThe findings of this study indicate that after the application of kinesiotherapy, during the active phase of labour in pregnant women induced by misoprostol, the number of vaginal deliveries increases.Brazilian registry of clinical trials rebecRBR-3mvj4m7.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41341928 · DOI · PMC12671676

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Misoprostol and pregnancy [5]
    Goldberg AB, Greenberg MB, Darney PD · N Engl J Med · 2001 · cited 229 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Misoprostol: pharmacokinetic profiles, effects on the uterus and side-effects [6]
    Tang OS, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Ho PC · Int J Gynaecol Obstet · 2007 · cited 174 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing the use of Foley catheters, misoprostol, and dinoprostone for cervical ripening in the induction of labour [7]
    Chen W, Xue J, Peprah MK, Wen SW, Walker M, Gao Y, et al. · BJOG · 2016 · cited 137 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis [8]
    Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Wears RL, Delke I, Gaudier FL · Obstet Gynecol · 1997 · cited 134 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Mifepristone With Buccal Misoprostol for Medical Abortion: A Systematic Review [9]
    Chen MJ, Creinin MD · Obstet Gynecol · 2015 · cited 126 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Prevention of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal ulcers [10]
    Rostom A, Dube C, Wells G, Tugwell P, Welch V, Jolicoeur E, et al. · Cochrane Database Syst Rev · 2002 · cited 123 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Moseson H, Jayaweera R, Raifman S, Keefe-Oates B, Filippa S, Motana R, et al.. Self-managed medication abortion outcomes: results from a prospective pilot study. . 2020. PMID 33109230 · DOI · PMC7588945
  2. Wu HL, Marwah S, Wang P, Wang QM, Chen XW. Misoprostol for medical treatment of missed abortion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. . 2017. PMID 28490770 · DOI · PMC5431938
  3. Upadhyay UD, Koenig LR, Meckstroth K, Ko J, Valladares ES, Biggs MA. Effectiveness and safety of telehealth medication abortion in the USA. . 2024. PMID 38361123 · DOI · PMC11031403
  4. Almeida MO, Delgado A, da Silva RCB, Alves FC, Cabral NO, da Paz MMS, et al.. Comparison between kinesiotherapy and usual care during the first stage of labour in misoprostol-induced pregnant women: randomised clinical trial. . 2025. PMID 41341928 · DOI · PMC12671676
  5. Goldberg AB, Greenberg MB, Darney PD. Misoprostol and pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2001. PMID 11136959 · DOI
  6. Tang OS, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Ho PC. Misoprostol: pharmacokinetic profiles, effects on the uterus and side-effects. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007. PMID 17963768 · DOI
  7. Chen W, Xue J, Peprah MK, Wen SW, Walker M, Gao Y, et al.. A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing the use of Foley catheters, misoprostol, and dinoprostone for cervical ripening in the induction of labour. BJOG. 2016. PMID 26538408 · DOI
  8. Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Wears RL, Delke I, Gaudier FL. Misoprostol for cervical ripening and labor induction: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1997. PMID 9083326 · DOI
  9. Chen MJ, Creinin MD. Mifepristone With Buccal Misoprostol for Medical Abortion: A Systematic Review. Obstet Gynecol. 2015. PMID 26241251 · DOI
  10. Rostom A, Dube C, Wells G, Tugwell P, Welch V, Jolicoeur E, et al.. Prevention of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002. PMID 12519573 · DOI

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-10-31.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • IloprostDrugs and Chemicals
  • EicosanoidsDrugs and Chemicals
  • Leukotriene B4Drugs and Chemicals
  • Leukotriene C4Drugs and Chemicals
  • LeukotrienesDrugs and Chemicals
  • Prostaglandin D2Drugs and Chemicals

All 546 articles in Drugs and Chemicals →

At a glance

4,941
PubMed records on this heading
17%
published since 2020
703
review articles
1,297
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-10-31; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • IloprostDrugs and Chemicals
  • EicosanoidsDrugs and Chemicals
  • Leukotriene B4Drugs and Chemicals
  • Leukotriene C4Drugs and Chemicals
  • LeukotrienesDrugs and Chemicals

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Legal · Support