Relationship of intraamniotic digoxin to fetal demise

No. 360-Induced Abortion: Surgical Abortion and Second Trimester Medical Methods

OBJECTIVE

This guideline reviews evidence relating to the provision of surgical induced abortion (IA) and second trimester medical abortion, including pre- and post-procedural care.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, family physicians, nurses, midwives, residents, and other health care providers who currently or intend to provide and/or teach IAs.

TARGET POPULATION

Women with an unintended or abnormal first or second trimester pregnancy.

EVIDENCE

PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Database were searched using the key words: first-trimester surgical abortion, second-trimester surgical abortion, second-trimester medical abortion, dilation and evacuation, induction abortion, feticide, cervical preparation, cervical dilation, abortion complications. Results were restricted to English or French systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, and observational studies published from 1979 to July 2017. National and international clinical practice guidelines were consulted for review. Grey literature was not searched.

VALUES

The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology framework. The summary of findings is available upon request.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND/OR COSTS

IA is safe and effective. The benefits of IA outweigh the potential harms or costs. No new direct harms or costs identified with these guidelines.

Outcomes of dilation and evacuation with and without feticide by intra-cardiac potassium chloride injection: a service evaluation

OBJECTIVE

To compare procedure duration, complications, and acceptability of dilation and evacuation (D&E) with and without feticide by intra-cardiac potassium chloride (KCL) injection.

STUDY DESIGN

We evaluated outcomes with D&E at 18-24 weeks of gestation in the 6 months before and 6 months after removing feticide with KCL from the guidelines of a national British abortion provider. We extracted demographic and procedure-related data from medical records and electronic databases. We surveyed women undergoing D&E in both time periods about acceptability and side effects.

RESULTS

We analyzed 291 cases with and 257 cases without KCL. Unadjusted mean procedure duration was shorter with KCL than without (12.7 vs. 16.1 min, respectively, p<.001). After adjustment for age, parity, Cesarean deliveries, gestational age, body mass index, surgeon, and number or duration of osmotic dilators used, KCL remained associated with a 3.5 min (95% CI 2.4-4.6) reduction in D&E duration. Uterine atony was more common with KCL than without (3% vs. 0%, respectively, p=.004), despite more frequent administration of prophylactic utero-tonics to women who received KCL (82% KCL vs. 73% no-KCL, p=.001). Women who had KCL reported more pain in the period between feticide and dilator placement and the evacuation than women who had not received feticide (49% vs. 25%, respectively, p<.001). Most women in both groups found their procedure very acceptable or acceptable (79% KCL vs. 87% no-KCL, p=.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Feticide with intra-cardiac KCL reduced D&E procedure duration, but was associated with more pain and uterine atony. Treatment acceptability was high with and without feticide.

IMPLICATIONS

Inducing fetal demise before dilation and evacuation with intra-cardiac potassium chloride may result in shorter operative times but does not appear to improve safety or acceptability. Level I evidence remains needed to support the use of feticide before surgical abortion.

A qualitative study of digoxin injection before dilation and evacuation

OBJECTIVE

We sought to qualitatively understand patients' experiences with digoxin as a step before dilation and evacuation (D&E).

STUDY DESIGN

We recruited English-speaking women from one abortion health center where digoxin is routinely used before D&E. We interviewed participants one to three weeks after the D&E about physical and emotional experiences with digoxin and understanding of its purpose. Using grounded theory, we analyzed transcripts iteratively, identifying themes from interviews; we stopped recruitment when we reached thematic saturation.

RESULTS

We conducted 20 interviews and participants described mixed experiences. Three overarching themes from the qualitative interviews were: (1) physical and emotional discomfort; (2) varied understanding of digoxin's purpose and effects; and (3) reassurance. Most participants described significantly negative experiences with digoxin; however, many participants also described positive aspects of the injection intermingled with those negative experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants' experiences with digoxin before D&E were both polarized and nuanced. While participants were largely clear about digoxin's action, they were much less clear about the reason for its use.

IMPLICATIONS

Both the clinical purpose for and patients' experiences with digoxin before D&E are complicated. Providers who continue to use digoxin should consider patient preferences in how they offer digoxin, and consider tools to ensure patient understanding.