Two-pill regimens of misoprostol after mifepristone medical abortion through 63 days' gestational age: a randomized controlled trial of sublingual and oral misoprostol

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion became an alternative method of pregnancy termination following the development of prostaglandins and antiprogesterone in the 1970s and 1980s. Recently, synthesis inhibitors of oestrogen (such as letrozole) have also been used to enhance efficacy. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (such as misoprostol, which has a strong uterotonic effect), mifepristone, mifepristone with prostaglandins, and letrozole with prostaglandins. More evidence is needed to identify the best dosage, regimen, and route of administration to optimise patient outcomes. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and side effects of different medical methods for first trimester abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and LILACs on 28 February 2021. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different medical methods for abortion before the 12th week of gestation. The primary outcome is failure to achieve complete abortion. Secondary outcomes are mortality, surgical evacuation, ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus, blood transfusion, side effects and women's dissatisfaction with the method.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and evaluated studies for inclusion, and assessed the risk of bias. We processed data using Review Manager 5 software. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 studies in the review (58 from the original review and 41 new studies). 1. Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin Mifepristone dose: high-dose (600 mg) compared to low-dose (200 mg) mifepristone probably has similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 3494 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin dose: 800 µg misoprostol probably reduces abortion failure compared to 400 µg (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.78; I2= 0%; 3 RCTs, 4424 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin timing: misoprostol administered on day one probably achieves more success on complete abortion than on day three (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.58; 1489 women; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence). Administration strategy: there may be no difference in failure of complete abortion with self-administration at home compared with hospital administration (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.94; I2 = 84%; 2263 women; 4 RCTs; low-certainty evidence), but failure may be higher when administered by nurses in hospital compared to by doctors in hospital (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.22; I2 = 66%; 3 RCTs, 3056 women; low-certainty evidence). Administration route: oral misoprostol probably leads to more failures than the vaginal route (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.87; I2 = 39%; 3 RCTs, 1704 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.26; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1380 women; low-certainty evidence) and diarrhoea (RR 1.80 95% CI 1.49 to 2.17; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1379 women). Compared with the vaginal route, complete abortion failure is probably lower with sublingual (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11; I2 = 59%; 2 RCTs, 3229 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be lower with buccal administration (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 479 women; low-certainty evidence), but sublingual or buccal routes may lead to more side effects. Women may experience more vomiting with sublingual compared to buccal administration (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.77; low-certainty evidence). 2. Mifepristone alone versus combined regimen The efficacy of mifepristone alone in achieving complete abortion compared to combined mifepristone/prostaglandin up to 12 weeks is unclear (RR of failure 3.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 13.09; I2 = 83%; 3 RCTs, 273 women; very low-certainty evidence). 3. Prostaglandin alone versus combined regimen Nineteen studies compared prostaglandin alone to a combined regimen (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate). Compared to any of the combination regimens, misoprostol alone may increase the risk for failure to achieve complete abortion (RR of failure 2.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 3.02; I2 = 64%; 18 RCTs, 3471 women; low-certainty evidence), and with more diarrhoea. 4. Prostaglandin alone (route of administration) Oral misoprostol alone may lead to more failures in complete abortion than the vaginal route (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.56 to 8.71, 2 RCTs, 216 women; low-certainty evidence). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be slightly reduced with sublingual compared with vaginal (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.28; I2 = 87%; 5 RCTs, 2705 women; low-certainty evidence) and oral administration (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.99; I2 = 66%; 2 RCTs, 173 women). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be similar or slightly higher with sublingual administration compared to buccal administration (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.74; 1 study, 401 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate) may be more effective than single agents (prostaglandin alone or mifepristone alone). In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can probably be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing effectiveness. Vaginal misoprostol is probably more effective than oral administration, and may have fewer side effects than sublingual or buccal. Some results are limited by the small numbers of participants on which they are based. Almost all studies were conducted in settings with good access to emergency services, which may limit the generalisability of these results.

Cannabinoids for Pain Control During Medical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether prophylactic dronabinol, a synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol, reduces pain during medical abortion.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of women undergoing medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol up through 70 days of gestation. All participants received 800 mg of ibuprofen and were randomized to either 5 mg of oral dronabinol or a placebo 30 minutes before misoprostol administration. Participants used a text messaging service to report pain on a numeric rating scale from 0 to 10 (0=no pain, 10=worst pain). The primary outcome was maximum pain experienced during the 24 hours after misoprostol administration. Secondary outcomes were pain scores at 0, 6, and 24 hours after misoprostol administration; maximum anxiety and nausea scores; use of additional pain medication; reported side effects; and satisfaction (yes or no). We needed 68 participants (34 per group) to have 80% power to detect a 2-point difference in maximum pain on a numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

From November 2018 to May 2019, we randomized 70 women (dronabinol=35, placebo=35). Participants in the study arms had comparable baseline characteristics. We found no difference between groups in the median maximum pain score reported (dronabinol 7 [interquartile range 6-8], placebo 7 [interquartile range 5-8], P=.82) or median pain scores at any timepoint. Groups were also no different in mean maximum anxiety (dronabinol 3.33 [SD 3.06], placebo 3.23 [SD 2.53], P=.88) or nausea scores (dronabinol 2.21 [SD 2.32], placebo 2.72 [SD 2.64], P=.41). Most women were satisfied with their pain management (76% dronabinol, 82% placebo, P=.51).

CONCLUSION

Dronabinol does not reduce the maximum level of pain experienced by women undergoing medical abortion.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03604341.

Medical termination for pregnancy in early first trimester (≤ 63 days) using combination of mifepristone and misoprostol or misoprostol alone: a systematic review

Background

A wide range of drugs have been studied for first trimester medical abortion. Studies evaluating different regimens, including combination mifepristone and misoprostol and misoprostol alone regimens, show varying results related to safety, efficacy and other outcomes. Thus, the objectives of this systematic review were to compare the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of medical abortion and to compare medical with surgical methods of abortion ≤63 days of gestation.

Methods

Pubmed and EMBASE were systematically searched from database inception through January 2019 using a combination of MeSH, keywords and text words.

Randomized controlled trials on induced abortion at ≤63 days that compared different regimens of medical abortion using mifepristone and/or misoprostol and trials that compared medical with surgical methods of abortion were included.

We extracted data into a pre-designed form, calculated effect estimates, and performed meta-analyses where possible. The primary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy and successful abortion.

Results

Thirty-three studies composed of 22,275 participants were included in this review. Combined regimens using mifepristone and misoprostol had lower rates of ongoing pregnancy, higher rates of successful abortion and satisfaction compared to misoprostol only regimens. In combined regimens, misoprostol 800 μg was more effective than 400 μg. There was no significant difference in dosing intervals between mifepristone and misoprostol and routes of misoprostol administration in combination or misoprostol alone regimens. The rate of serious adverse events was generally low.

Conclusion

In this systematic review, we find that medical methods of abortion utilizing combination mifepristone and misoprostol or misoprostol alone are effective, safe and acceptable. More robust studies evaluating both the different combination and misoprostol alone regimens are needed to strengthen existing evidence as well as assess patient perspectives towards a particular regimen.

Opioid Analgesia for Medical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the effect of oral opioids on patient pain during first-trimester medical abortion.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial where patients up to 10 0/7 weeks of gestation undergoing a medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol took 10 mg oral oxycodone or placebo at onset of painful cramping. Additionally, all patients received 800-mg ibuprofen tablets, 4-mg ondansetron oral dissolving tablets, and a written prescription for adjunctive pain medication (six tablets oxycodone 5 mg). Participants used a text-messaging service to report pain scores on a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 (0 being no pain, 10 being worst pain) for 24 hours at start of misoprostol dosing. The primary outcome was maximum pain experienced within 24 hours postmisoprostol. Our secondary outcomes were maximum pain stratified by gestational age (less than 7 weeks of gestation, 7-10 weeks of gestation), duration of maximum pain, use of adjunctive medication, presence of nausea or vomiting, and satisfaction. We needed at least 76 participants per group to differentiate a clinically important pain difference of 2 points on the numerical rating scale.

RESULTS

From May 2017 to May 2018, we randomized 172 participants (placebo group with 86, oxycodone group with 86). The study groups had comparable baseline characteristics. We found no difference between groups in median maximum pain scores (placebo 8 [range 1-10], oxycodone 8 [range 2-10], P=.92) and the median duration of maximum pain (placebo 0.75 hours range 0.01-15 vs oxycodone 1 hour range 0.02-10, P=.39). Groups were also similar in the proportion obtaining (placebo 62%, oxycodone 49%, P=.09) and using (placebo 48%, oxycodone 40%, P=.28) adjunctive medication, experiencing nausea or vomiting (placebo 59%, oxycodone 65%, P=.43) and reported satisfaction with pain medications (placebo 62%, oxycodone 65%, P=.63).

CONCLUSION

Oxycodone does not reduce the maximum level of pain experienced by women undergoing medical abortion up to 10 0/7 weeks of gestation or improve satisfaction.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03139240.

Pain during medical abortion, the impact of the regimen: a neglected issue? A review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate pain and other early adverse events associated with different regimens of medical abortion up to nine weeks of amenorrhoea.

METHODS

The literature was searched for comparative studies of medical abortion using mifepristone followed by the prostaglandin analogue misoprostol. Publications, which included pain assessment were further analysed.

RESULTS

Of the 1459 publications on medical abortion identified, only 23 comparative, prospective trials corresponded to the inclusion criteria. Patients in these studies received different dosages of mifepristone in combination with different dosages of misoprostol administered via diverse routes or at various intervals. Information on pain level was reported in 12/23 papers (52%), information regarding systematic administration of analgesics in 12/23 articles (52%) and information concerning analgesia used was available for only 10/23 studies (43%).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither pain nor its treatment are systematically reported in clinical trials of medical abortion; this shortcoming reflects a neglect of the individual pain perception. When data are mentioned, they are too inconsistent to allow for any comparison between different treatment protocols. Standardised evaluation of pain is needed and the correlation between the dosage of misoprostol and the intensity of pain must be assessed in future studies.

Efficacy and acceptability of early mifepristone-misoprostol medical abortion in Ukraine: results of two clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Abortion services are legally available in Ukraine although there are issues in quality and access. Two studies were conducted in Ukraine to expand options for women, and to determine the efficacy and acceptability of medical abortion.

STUDY DESIGN

Two open-label clinical trials were conducted at six clinics in Ukraine. Women were given 200 mg mifepristone followed after 48 hours by 400 μg oral misoprostol (Study One) and mifepristone followed after 24 hours by 400 μg sublingual misoprostol (Study Two). Follow-up visits were scheduled for two weeks after mifepristone administration to assess whether complete uterine evacuation had occurred.

RESULTS

Success rates were 97% in the first study and 98% in the second one. The vast majority of participants were satisfied or very satisfied with their abortion method (Study One: 94%; Study Two: 98%).

CONCLUSIONS

The two studies demonstrate high rates of success and acceptability of early medical abortion in Ukraine.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

BACKGROUND

Surgical abortion by vacuum aspiration or dilatation and curettage has been the method of choice for early pregnancy termination since the 1960s. Medical abortion became an alternative method of first trimester pregnancy termination with the availability of prostaglandins in the early 1970s and anti-progesterones in the 1980s. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (PGs) alone, mifepristone alone, methotrexate alone, mifepristone with prostaglandins and methotrexate with prostaglandins.

OBJECTIVES

To compare different medical methods for first trimester abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE and Popline were systematically searched. Reference lists of retrieved papers were also searched. Experts in WHO/HRP were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies Randomised controlled trials comparing different medical methods for abortion during first trimester (e.g. single drug, combination) were considered. Trials were assessed and included if they had adequate concealment of allocation, randomisation procedure and follow-up. Women, pregnant during the first trimester, undergoing medical abortion were the participants. The outcomes were mortality, failure to achieve complete abortion, surgical evacuation, ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus, blood transfusion, side effects and women's dissatisfaction with the procedure.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion from the results of the search strategy described previously.The selection of trials for inclusion in the review was performed independently by two reviewers after employing the search strategy described previously. Trials under consideration were evaluated for appropriateness for inclusion and methodological quality without consideration of their results. Data were processed using Revman software.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-eight trials were included in the review. The effectiveness outcomes below refer to 'failure to achieve complete abortion' with the intended method unless otherwise stated. 1) Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin: Mifepristone 600 mg compared to 200 mg shows similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (4 trials, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.32). Misoprostol administered orally is less effective (more failures) than the vaginal route (RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.44 to 6.24) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea and diarrhoea. Sublingual and buccal routes were similarly effective compared to the vaginal route, but had higher rates of side effects. 2) Mifepristone alone is less effective when compared to the combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin (RR 3.76 95% CI 2.30 to 6.15). 3) Five trials compared prostaglandin alone to the combined regimen (mifepristone/prostaglandin). All but one reported higher effectiveness with the combined regimen. The results of these studies could not be combined but the RR of failure with prostaglandin alone is reportedly between 1.4 to 3.75 with the 95% confidence intervals indicating statistical significance. 4) In one trial comparing gemeprost 0.5 mg with misoprostol 800 mcg, misoprostol was more effective (failure with gemeprost: RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.18). 5) There was no difference in effectiveness with use of a divided dose compared to a single dose of prostaglandin. 6) Combined regimen methotrexate/prostaglandin demonstrates similar rates of failure to complete abortion when comparing intramuscular to oral methotrexate administration (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.51 to 8.07). Similarly, day 3 vs. day 5 administration of prostaglandin following methotrexate administration showed no significant differences (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.43). One trial compared the effect of tamoxifen vs. methotrexate and no statistically significant differences were observed in effectiveness between the groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens are more effective than single agents. In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing the method effectiveness. Vaginal misoprostol is more effective than oral administration, and has less side effects than sublingual or buccal. Some results are limited by the small numbers of participants on which they are based. Almost all trials were conducted in settings with good access to emergency services, which may limit the generalizability of these results.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

BACKGROUND

Surgical abortion up to 63 days by vacuum aspiration or dilatation and curettage has been the method of choice since the 1960s. Medical abortion became an alternative method of first trimester pregnancy termination with the availability of prostaglandins in the early 1970s and anti-progesterones in the 1980s. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (PGs) alone, mifepristone alone, methotrexate alone, mifepristone with prostaglandins and methotrexate with prostaglandins.

OBJECTIVES

To compare different medical methods for first trimester abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE and Popline were systematically searched. Reference lists of retrieved papers were also searched. Experts in WHO/HRP were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing different medical methods (e.g. single drug, combination), ways of application, or different dose regimens, single or combined, for medical abortion, were considered. Trials were assessed and included if they had adequate concealment of allocation, randomisation procedure and follow-up. Women, pregnant in the first trimester, undergoing medical abortion were the participants. Different medical methods used for first trimester abortion, compared with each other or placebo were included. The outcomes sought include mortality, failure to achieve complete abortion, surgical evacuation (as emergency procedure, non-emergency procedure, or undefined), ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus (> 3-6 hours), blood transfusion, blood loss (measured or clinically relevant drop in haemoglobin), days of bleeding, pain resulting from the procedure (reported by the women or measured by use of analgesics), additional uterotonics used, women's dissatisfaction with the procedure, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently selected trials for inclusion from the results of the search strategy described previously. The selection of trials for inclusion in the review was performed independently by two reviewers after employing the search strategy described previously. Trials under consideration were evaluated for appropriateness for inclusion and methodological quality without consideration of their results. A form was designed to facilitate the data extraction. Data were processed using Revman software.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-nine trials were included in the review. The effectiveness outcomes below refer to 'failure to achieve complete abortion' with the intended method unless otherwise stated. 1) Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin: Mifepristone 600 mg compared to 200 mg shows similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (4 trials, RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.32). Misoprostol administered orally is less effective (more failures) than the vaginal route (RR 3.00, 95% CI 1.44 to 6.24) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea and diarrhoea. 2) Mifepristone alone is less effective compared to the combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin (RR 3.76 95% CI 2.30 to 6.15). 3) Similarly, the 5 trials included in the comparison of prostaglandin compared to the combined regimen reported in all but one higher effectiveness with the combined regime compared to prostaglandin. The results of these studies were not pooled but the RR of failure with prostaglandin alone is between 1.4 to 3.75 and the 95% confidence intervals indicate statistical significance. 4) In one trial comparing gemeprost 0.5 mg with misoprostol 800 mcg, misoprostol was more effective (failure with gemeprost: RR 2.86, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.18). 5) There was no difference when using split dose compared to single dose of prostaglandin. 6) Combined regimen methotrexate/prostaglandin: there was no statistically significant difference in failure to achieve complete abortion comparing methotrexate administered intramuscular to oral (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.51 to 8.07). Similarly, early (day 3) vs late (day 5) administration of prostaglandin showed no significant of prostaglandin showed no significant difference (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.43). One trial compared the effect of tamoxifen vs methotrexate and no statistically significant differences were observed in effectiveness between the groups.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens are more effective than single agents. In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing the method effectiveness. Misoprostol vaginally is more effective than orally. Some of the results are based on small studies only and therefore carry some uncertainty. Almost all trials were conducted in hospital settings with good access to support and emergency services. It is therefore not clear if the results are readily applicable to under-resourced settings where such services are lacking even if the agents used are available.