Medical treatment of missed abortion using misoprostol

Investigation of serum trimethylamine-N-oxide levels in missed abortion: A prospective study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to investigate the relationship between missed abortion and serum trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) levels.

METHODS

A total of 129 patients with 56 missed abortions and 73 healthy pregnancies were included in our study. Patients who had more than one pregnancy loss, had systemic disease (hypertension, diabetes, rheumatologic disease, hematologic disease, and so forth) and did not accept to participate in the study were excluded. Pregnant women who did not have a fetal heartbeat in the first 20th week of pregnancy were considered as missed abortion. Demographic characteristics of the patients were recorded. The serum TMAO levels of these patients were compared with the serum TMAO levels of healthy pregnant women with the same gestational week between the two groups.

RESULTS

The median (IQR) serum level of TMAO was significantly higher in woman with missed abortus compared to the healthy controls (201.5 [IQR, 129.75-345] vs 150 [IQR, 86.9-273], U = 1534, P = 0.015, rrb = 0.25 [95% CI: 0.05-0.43]). We observed a positive and significant relationship between serum TMAO levels and age of the patients (Spearman's rho = 0.272 [95% CI: 0.01-0.50], P = 0.043). However, no significant relationship was found between serum TMAO levels and BMI (Spearman's rho = 0.093 [95% CI: -0.18 to 0.35], P = 0.496).

CONCLUSION

In our study, we found that the serum TMAO level was higher in patients with missed abortion compared to healthy pregnancies. Serum TMAO levels measured at early gestational weeks can provide information about the course of pregnancy.

Methods for managing miscarriage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their lifetime. An estimated 15% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Miscarriage can lead to serious morbidity, including haemorrhage, infection, and even death, particularly in settings without adequate healthcare provision. Early miscarriages occur during the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, and can be managed expectantly, medically or surgically. However, there is uncertainty about the relative effectiveness and risks of each option.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the relative effectiveness and safety profiles for the different management methods for early miscarriage, and to provide rankings of the available methods according to their effectiveness, safety, and side-effect profile using a network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (9 February 2021), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (12 February 2021), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness or safety of methods for miscarriage management. Early miscarriage was defined as less than or equal to 14 weeks of gestation, and included missed and incomplete miscarriage. Management of late miscarriages after 14 weeks of gestation (often referred to as intrauterine fetal deaths) was not eligible for inclusion in the review. Cluster- and quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved. We excluded non-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least three review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for the primary outcomes of complete miscarriage and composite outcome of death or serious complications. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Relative effects for the primary outcomes are reported subgrouped by the type of miscarriage (incomplete and missed miscarriage). We also performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Our network meta-analysis included 78 randomised trials involving 17,795 women from 37 countries. Most trials (71/78) were conducted in hospital settings and included women with missed or incomplete miscarriage. Across 158 trial arms, the following methods were used: 51 trial arms (33%) used misoprostol; 50 (32%) used suction aspiration; 26 (16%) used expectant management or placebo; 17 (11%) used dilatation and curettage; 11 (6%) used mifepristone plus misoprostol; and three (2%) used suction aspiration plus cervical preparation. Of these 78 studies, 71 (90%) contributed data in a usable form for meta-analysis. Complete miscarriage Based on the relative effects from the network meta-analysis of 59 trials (12,591 women), we found that five methods may be more effective than expectant management or placebo for achieving a complete miscarriage: · suction aspiration after cervical preparation (risk ratio (RR) 2.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.20, low-certainty evidence), · dilatation and curettage (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.75, low-certainty evidence), · suction aspiration (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.62, low-certainty evidence), · mifepristone plus misoprostol (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66, moderate-certainty evidence), · misoprostol (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.46, low-certainty evidence). The highest ranked surgical method was suction aspiration after cervical preparation. The highest ranked non-surgical treatment was mifepristone plus misoprostol. All surgical methods were ranked higher than medical methods, which in turn ranked above expectant management or placebo. Composite outcome of death and serious complications Based on the relative effects from the network meta-analysis of 35 trials (8161 women), we found that four methods with available data were compatible with a wide range of treatment effects compared with expectant management or placebo: · dilatation and curettage (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.06, low-certainty evidence), · suction aspiration (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.32, low-certainty evidence), · misoprostol (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.15, low-certainty evidence), · mifepristone plus misoprostol (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.84, low-certainty evidence). Importantly, no deaths were reported in these studies, thus this composite outcome was entirely composed of serious complications, including blood transfusions, uterine perforations, hysterectomies, and intensive care unit admissions. Expectant management and placebo ranked the lowest when compared with alternative treatment interventions. Subgroup analyses by type of miscarriage (missed or incomplete) agreed with the overall analysis in that surgical methods were the most effective treatment, followed by medical methods and then expectant management or placebo, but there are possible subgroup differences in the effectiveness of the available methods.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on relative effects from the network meta-analysis, all surgical and medical methods for managing a miscarriage may be more effective than expectant management or placebo. Surgical methods were ranked highest for managing a miscarriage, followed by medical methods, which in turn ranked above expectant management or placebo. Expectant management or placebo had the highest chance of serious complications, including the need for unplanned or emergency surgery. A subgroup analysis showed that surgical and medical methods may be more beneficial in women with missed miscarriage compared to women with incomplete miscarriage. Since type of miscarriage (missed and incomplete) appears to be a source of inconsistency and heterogeneity within these data, we acknowledge that the main network meta-analysis may be unreliable. However, we plan to explore this further in future updates and consider the primary analysis as separate networks for missed and incomplete miscarriage.

Mifepristone and misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for uterine evacuation after early pregnancy failure: study protocol for a randomized double blinded placebo-controlled comparison (Triple M Trial)

BACKGROUND

Early pregnancy failure (EPF) is a common complication of pregnancy. If women do not abort spontaneously, they will undergo medical or surgical treatment in order to remove the products of conception from the uterus. Curettage, although highly effective, is associated with a risk of complications; medical treatment with misoprostol is a safe and less expensive alternative. Unfortunately, after 1 week of expectant management in case of EPF, medical treatment with misoprostol has a complete evacuation rate of approximately 50%. Misoprostol treatment results may be improved by pre-treatment with mifepristone; its effectiveness has already been proven for other indications of pregnancy termination. This study will test the hypothesis that, in EPF, the sequential combination of mifepristone with misoprostol is superior to the use of misoprostol alone in terms of complete evacuation (primary outcome), patient satisfaction, complications, side effects and costs (secondary outcomes).

METHODS

The trial will be performed multi-centred, prospectively, two-armed, randomised, double-blinded and placebo-controlled. Women with confirmed EPF by ultrasonography (6-14 weeks), managed expectantly for at least 1 week, can be included and randomised to pre-treatment with oral mifepristone (600 mg) or oral placebo (identical in appearance). Randomisation will take place after receiving written consent to participate. In both arms pre-treatment will be followed by oral misoprostol, which will start 36-48 h later consisting of two doses 400 μg (4 hrs apart), repeated after 24 h if no tissue is lost. Four hundred sixty-four women will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by centre. Ultrasonography 2 weeks after treatment will determine short term treatment effect. When the gestational sac is expulsed, expectant management is advised until 6 weeks after treatment when the definitive primary endpoint, complete or incomplete evacuation, will be determined. A sonographic endometrial thickness < 15 mm using only the allocated therapy by randomisation is considered as successful treatment. Secondary outcome measures (patient satisfaction, complications, side effects and costs) will be registered using a case report form, patient diary and validated questionnaires (Short Form 36, EuroQol-VAS, Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, iMTA Productivity Cost Questionnaire).

DISCUSSION

This trial will answer the question if, in case of EPF, after at least 1 week of expectant management, sequential treatment with mifepristone and misoprostol is more effective than misoprostol alone to achieve complete evacuation of the products of conception.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov (d.d. 02-07-2017): NCT03212352. Trialregister.nl (d.d. 03-07-2017): NTR6550. EudraCT number (d.d. 07-08-2017): 2017-002694-19. File number Commisie Mensgebonden Onderzoek (d.d. 07-08-2017): NL 62449.091.17.

Medical treatment for early fetal death (less than 24 weeks)

BACKGROUND

In most pregnancies that miscarry, arrest of embryonic or fetal development occurs some time (often weeks) before the miscarriage occurs. Ultrasound examination can reveal abnormal findings during this phase by demonstrating anembryonic pregnancies or embryonic or fetal death. Treatment has traditionally been surgical but medical treatments may be effective, safe, and acceptable, as may be waiting for spontaneous miscarriage. This is an update of a review first published in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To assess, from clinical trials, the effectiveness and safety of different medical treatments for the termination of non-viable pregnancies.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (24 October 2018) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing medical treatment with another treatment (e.g. surgical evacuation), or placebo, or no treatment for early pregnancy failure. Quasi-randomised studies were excluded. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion, as were studies reported in abstract form, if sufficient information was available to assess eligibility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-three studies (4966 women) were included. The main interventions examined were vaginal, sublingual, oral and buccal misoprostol, mifepristone and vaginal gemeprost. These were compared with surgical management, expectant management, placebo, or different types of medical interventions were compared with each other. The review includes a wide variety of different interventions which have been analysed across 23 different comparisons. Many of the comparisons consist of single studies. We limited the grading of the quality of evidence to two main comparisons: vaginal misoprostol versus placebo and vaginal misoprostol versus surgical evacuation of the uterus. Risk of bias varied widely among the included trials. The quality of the evidence varied between the different comparisons, but was mainly found to be very-low or low quality.Vaginal misoprostol versus placeboVaginal misoprostol may hasten miscarriage when compared with placebo: e.g. complete miscarriage (5 trials, 305 women, risk ratio (RR) 4.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.01 to 5.94; low-quality evidence). No trial reported on pelvic infection rate for this comparison. Vaginal misoprostol made little difference to rates of nausea (2 trials, 88 women, RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.43 to 4.40; low-quality evidence), diarrhoea (2 trials, 88 women, RR 2.21, 95% CI 0.35 to 14.06; low-quality evidence) or to whether women were satisfied with the acceptability of the method (1 trial, 32 women, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.64; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether vaginal misoprostol reduces blood loss (haemoglobin difference > 10 g/L) (1 trial, 50 women, RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.12; very-low quality) or pain (opiate use) (1 trial, 84 women, RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 101.11; very-low quality), because the quality of the evidence for these outcomes was found to be very low.Vaginal misoprostol versus surgical evacuation Vaginal misoprostol may be less effective in accomplishing a complete miscarriage compared to surgical management (6 trials, 943 women, average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.50; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.03, I² = 46%; low-quality evidence) and may be associated with more nausea (1 trial, 154 women, RR 21.85, 95% CI 1.31 to 364.37; low-quality evidence) and diarrhoea (1 trial, 154 women, RR 40.85, 95% CI 2.52 to 662.57; low-quality evidence). There may be little or no difference between vaginal misoprostol and surgical evacuation for pelvic infection (1 trial, 618 women, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.37; low-quality evidence), blood loss (post-treatment haematocrit (%) (1 trial, 50 women, mean difference (MD) 1.40%, 95% CI -3.51 to 0.71; low-quality evidence), pain relief (1 trial, 154 women, RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.46; low-quality evidence) or women's satisfaction/acceptability of method (1 trial, 45 women, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.11; low-quality evidence).Other comparisonsBased on findings from a single trial, vaginal misoprostol was more effective at accomplishing complete miscarriage than expectant management (614 women, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.45). There was little difference between vaginal misoprostol and sublingual misoprostol (5 trials, 513 women, average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.16; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.10, I² = 871%; or between oral and vaginal misoprostol in terms of complete miscarriage at less than 13 weeks (4 trials, 418 women), average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.03; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.13, I² = 90%). However, there was less abdominal pain with vaginal misoprostol in comparison to sublingual (3 trials, 392 women, RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.74). A single study (46 women) found mifepristone to be more effective than placebo: miscarriage complete by day five after treatment (46 women, RR 9.50, 95% CI 2.49 to 36.19). However the quality of this evidence is very low: there is a very serious risk of bias with signs of incomplete data and no proper intention-to-treat analysis in the included study; and serious imprecision with wide confidence intervals. Mifepristone did not appear to further hasten miscarriage when added to a misoprostol regimen (3 trials, 447 women, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.47).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence from randomised trials suggests that medical treatment with vaginal misoprostol may be an acceptable alternative to surgical evacuation or expectant management. In general, side effects of medical treatment were minor, consisting mainly of nausea and diarrhoea. There were no major differences in effectiveness between different routes of administration. Treatment satisfaction was addressed in only a few studies, in which the majority of women were satisfied with the received intervention. Since the quality of evidence is low or very low for several comparisons, mainly because they included only one or two (small) trials; further research is necessary to assess the effectiveness, safety and side effects, optimal route of administration and dose of different medical treatments for early fetal death.

Outcomes in prevention and management of miscarriage trials: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a substantial body of research evaluating ways to prevent and manage miscarriage, but all studies do not report on the same outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To review systematically, outcomes reported in existing miscarriage trials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from inception until January 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting prevention or management of miscarriage. Miscarriage was defined as a pregnancy loss in the first trimester.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data about the study characteristics, primary, and secondary outcomes were extracted.

MAIN RESULTS

We retrieved 1553 titles and abstracts, from which 208 RCTs were included. For prevention of miscarriage, the most commonly reported primary outcome was live birth and the top four reported outcomes were pregnancy loss/stillbirth (n = 112), gestation of birth (n = 68), birth dimensions (n = 65), and live birth (n = 49). For these four outcomes, 58 specific measures were used for evaluation. For management of miscarriage, the most commonly reported primary outcome was efficacy of treatment. The top four reported outcomes were bleeding (n = 186), efficacy of miscarriage treatment (n = 105), infection (n = 97), and quality of life (n = 90). For these outcomes, 130 specific measures were used for evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review found considerable variation in the reporting of primary and secondary outcomes along with the measures used to assess them. There is a need for standardised patient-centred clinical outcomes through the development of a core outcome set; the work from this systematic review will form the foundation of the core outcome set for miscarriage.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

There is disparity in the reporting of outcomes and the measures used to assess them in miscarriage trials.

Mifepristone Pretreatment for the Medical Management of Early Pregnancy Loss

BACKGROUND

Medical management of early pregnancy loss is an alternative to uterine aspiration, but standard medical treatment with misoprostol commonly results in treatment failure. We compared the efficacy and safety of pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol with the efficacy and safety of misoprostol use alone for the management of early pregnancy loss.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 300 women who had an anembryonic gestation or in whom embryonic or fetal death was confirmed to receive pretreatment with 200 mg of mifepristone, administered orally, followed by 800 μg of misoprostol, administered vaginally (mifepristone-pretreatment group), or 800 μg of misoprostol alone, administered vaginally (misoprostol-alone group). Participants returned 1 to 4 days after misoprostol use for evaluation, including ultrasound examination, by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment-group assignments. Women in whom the gestational sac was not expelled were offered expectant management, a second dose of misoprostol, or uterine aspiration. We followed all participants for 30 days after randomization. Our primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion with one dose of misoprostol by the first follow-up visit and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment.

RESULTS

Complete expulsion after one dose of misoprostol occurred in 124 of 148 women (83.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 76.8 to 89.3) in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 100 of 149 women (67.1%; 95% CI, 59.0 to 74.6) in the misoprostol-alone group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.43). Uterine aspiration was performed less frequently in the mifepristone-pretreatment group than in the misoprostol-alone group (8.8% vs. 23.5%; relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.68). Bleeding that resulted in blood transfusion occurred in 2.0% of the women in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 0.7% of the women in the misoprostol-alone group (P=0.31); pelvic infection was diagnosed in 1.3% of the women in each group.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol resulted in a higher likelihood of successful management of first-trimester pregnancy loss than treatment with misoprostol alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; PreFaiR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02012491 .).

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

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.

Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe, and acceptable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (13 May 2016) and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery, or alternative methods of medical treatment. We excluded quasi-randomised trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies (5577 women). There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; 2 studies, 150 women, random-effects; very low-quality evidence), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; 2 studies, 308 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. For unplanned surgical intervention, we did not identify any difference between misoprostol and expectant care (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; 2 studies, 308 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence).Sixteen trials involving 4044 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (7 studies used oral administration, 6 studies used vaginal, 2 studies sublingual, 1 study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.98; 15 studies, 3862 women, random-effects; very low-quality evidence) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.11; 13 studies, 3070 women, random-effects; very low-quality evidence) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.03, 95% CI 2.71 to 9.35; 11 studies, 2690 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.09; 11 studies, 3015 women, random-effects; low-quality evidence). We did not identify any difference in women's satisfaction between misoprostol and surgery (average RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.00; 9 studies, 3349 women, random-effects; moderate-quality evidence). More women had vomiting and diarrhoea with misoprostol compared with surgery (vomiting: average RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.36 to 2.85; 10 studies, 2977 women, random-effects; moderate-quality evidence; diarrhoea: average RR 4.82, 95% CI 1.09 to 21.32; 4 studies, 757 women, random-effects; moderate-quality evidence).Five trials compared different routes of administration, or doses, or both, of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Further studies, including long-term follow-up, are clearly needed to confirm these findings. There is an urgent need for studies on women who miscarry at more than 13 weeks' gestation.

A Comparative Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Vaginal vs Oral Prostaglandin E1 Analogue (Misoprostol) in Management of First Trimester Missed Abortion

INTRODUCTION

Missed miscarriages, occurring in upto 15% of all clinically recognized pregnancies are a cause of concern for the patients. Though many researchers in the past have compared the surgical and medical approaches in management of such patients, only a few have executed an appraisal of two routes of misoprostol at equal dosages in treatment of first trimester missed miscarriages.

AIM

To compare the efficacy of misoprostol by vaginal and oral route, for the management of first trimester missed abortion; and to recognize the utility of misoprostol for cervical dilation prior to any surgical termination of pregnancy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A randomized prospective trial, comparing the efficacy of misoprostol, by vaginal and oral routes, for termination of first trimester missed abortion was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Multi-Specialty Hospital, Chandigarh over one year. Hundred subjects satisfying the inclusion criteria from 213 consecutive women presenting to the institute with first trimester missed abortion were hospitalized. The study participants were randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups, using sequentially numbered envelopes, to receive 400mcg misoprostol vaginally or orally to a maximum of three doses six hours apart, and outcome documented. Patients were followed up on Day 14 and 6 weeks after discharge. Primary outcome evaluated was drug-induced complete expulsion of Products of Conception (POCs). Secondary outcomes measured were induction expulsion interval, number of doses required, classification of failures, cervical canal permeability in women requiring surgical evacuation, side effects, hemoglobin drop, duration and amount of post-abortal bleeding, time of resumption of menses, experience with side effects, patient satisfaction and acceptability to treatment.

RESULTS

Both routes were highly effective (vaginal=92%, oral= 74%, p=0.032), safe and acceptable with tolerable side effects. The mean time to expulsion was longer (13.24hrs) in the oral than vaginal group (10.87hrs). All 4 unsuccessful cases in vaginal group and 12 of 13 in oral group had permeable cervices prior to surgical evacuation. Most women labeled the side effects as tolerable in both the groups. Overall acceptance rate to treatment was high in both the groups A and B (76% and 70%).

CONCLUSION

Vaginal misoprostol is more effective than oral misoprostol for first trimester missed abortion.

Comparison of different regimes of misoprostol for the termination of early pregnancy failure

BACKGROUND

Nearly 20% of all confirmed pregnancies end in spontaneous abortion. Misoprostol's use in early pregnancy failure is varied and dose and route are not well established. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and the side effects of different regimes of misoprostol in causing expulsion of products of conception in early pregnancy failure.

METHOD

Women patients with an ultrasound diagnosis of early pregnancy failure, less than 12 weeks gestation were divided into two, Group-A: tab. Misoprostol 800 mcg 6 hourly vaginally, upto 3 doses. Group-B tablet misoprostol 600 mcg 6 hourly, sublingually for 3 doses. All observations were noted and statistical analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean gestational age was 7.93 weeks. Mean induction abortion interval 18.183 h. Women patients with less than six weeks gestational age had least mean induction-abortion interval time, 15.75 ± 2.82 h in vaginal group but was highest in sublingual group 22 ± 2 h and 18.43 h in overall (P = 0.02). Though after 8 weeks, both routes were equally effective. Mean dose required in group-A was 20044 mcg and in group-B was 1564 mcg (P < 0.001). Efficacy of protocol was 88.89% in group-A and 92.85% in group-B.

CONCLUSION

Both regimes had comparable efficacy, acceptability (90%) and side effects. In women patients less than six weeks period of gestation, the vaginal (800 mcg) route was distinctly superior, in women patients with 6-8 weeks the sublingual (600 mcg) route was more advantageous. The correct dose must be used for the route chosen. The route of administration should be decided in accordance with the preference of the patient and the clinical situation.

Effectiveness of a single dose of oral misoprostol 600 μg for treatment in early pregnancy failure

The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness, side-effects and acceptability of a single dose of oral misoprostol 600 μg for treatment of 1st trimester pregnancy failure. A prospective descriptive study was conducted on pregnant women of < 13 weeks' gestation, diagnosed as 1st trimester pregnancy failure. Patients were assigned to receive a single dose of misoprostol 600 μg orally and then evaluated 48 h after drug administration for complete abortion. A total of 55 women were recruited to the study. The complete abortion rate was 65.5%. Pain and diarrhoea were the most common side-effects. Acceptability and satisfactory rates were 70.9% and 70.9%, respectively. In conclusion, a single dose of oral misoprostol 600 μg is a fair method for the management of 1st trimester pregnancy failure. Side-effects are tolerable and satisfaction is high. Thus, this method may be used as an alternative treatment.

Misoprostol Abortion: Ultrasonography versus Beta-hCG Testing for Verification of Effectiveness

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Miscarriage is a common complication of early pregnancy with medical and psychological consequences. Dilation and Curettage are considered as two standard caring ways for early pregnancy failure. Alternatively misoprostol has been used as a single agent for termination of early pregnancy. Aim of the present study was to compare the usefulness of serum β-hCG measurement and ultrasound examination to predict complete abortion after medical induction.

METHODS

There were one hundred and thirty three patients experiencing missed abortion or blighted ovum. Ultrasound examination and serum β-hCG test were performed before treatment and during follow-up in all these patients.

RESULTS

Treatment was successful without any need for surgical intervention in 92.4% of the cases. Both methods could verify the complete abortion among all the patients at the end of the study (4(th) week). Kappa agreement coefficient for the two methods of diagnosis was 0.327 (P < 0.5).

CONCLUSION

Based on our results, β- hCG is as effective as ultrasound in confirming a successful medically induced abortion in early pregnancy, but it should be used as supplements to clinical assessments.

Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2012) and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery or alternative methods of medical treatment. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty studies (4208 women) were included. There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women, random-effects), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Twelve studies involving 2894 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (six studies used oral administration, four studies used vaginal, one study sub-lingual, one study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, 11 studies, 2493 women, random-effects) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; 11 studies, 2654 women, random-effects) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.82, 95% CI 2.93 to 11.56; nine studies, 2274 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.03; nine studies, 2179 women, random-effects).Five trials compared different routes of administration and/or doses of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Women experiencing miscarriage at less than 13 weeks should be offered an informed choice. Future studies should include long-term follow-up.

Laminaria tent versus Misoprostol for cervical ripening before surgical process in missed abortion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of Laminaria tents with Misoprostol for cervical ripening before surgical process in missed abortion.

METHOD

In a prospective study, 70 women with missed abortion were assigned to have either insertion of a 3 mm intracervical Laminaria tent (n = 35) or vaginal Misoprostol 400 μg (n = 35) on the day prior to suction dilation and curettage (D/C). The women were interviewed just prior to the D/C with regard to pain, vaginal bleeding, and cervical dilator preference.

RESULT

Cervical dilation was greater in the Laminaria group but not significantly different from that in the Misoprostol group. However, additional cervical dilation before D/C was required in more patients in the Misoprostol group (45.7 vs 14.3%, P = 0.001). Women who received Laminaria reported significantly more pain at the time of insertion (62.8% in Laminaria group vs 22.8% in Misoprostol group) compared with women who received Misoprostol. Conversely, Misoprostol was associated with more nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and vaginal bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Laminaria tents are more effective cervical dilators than vaginal Misoprostol when inserted the day prior to suction D and C. Vaginal Misoprostol insertion is more comfortable, although it is associated with an increased risk of vaginal bleeding.

[Clinical and ultrasonographic factors affecting successful medical treatment of early pregnancy failure]

OBJECTIVES

To assess clinical and echocardiographic factors impacting the effectiveness of misoprostol in early pregnancy failure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An observational study was carried out within the gynaecological emergency service from 01/06/2000 to 15/05/2010. Patients had pregnancy failure in the first 12 weeks at ultrasonic examination. The patient received 4 misoprostol tablets (800 μg) intravaginally with clinical and ultrasound examination 24 hours later. The treatment was considered effective if the endometrial thickness was lower than 15 mm by ultrasound examination and absence of secondary endo-uterine aspiration. If the treatment was considered as a failure, an endo-uterine aspiration was carried out. Variables studied were clinical (patient age, date of the last menstrual period, gravidity, parity, history of miscarriage, endouterine aspiration, ectopic pregnancy, vaginal delivery, caesarean section) and ultrasound-based (presence or absence of an embryo, CRL, gestational sac diameter).

RESULTS

Five hundred and one patients were included. The success rate was 336/501 (67.1%). After univariate analysis, the averages of parity (P=0.048) and caesarean section (P=0.002) were significantly higher in failure cases. The history of one or more caesarean section was a significant risk factor for failure (P=0.001). There was no significant difference for the other criteria. In multivariate analysis, the average number of caesarean sections (P=0.003) and the history of one or more caesarean section remained significant (P=0.002).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The ultrasound criteria and gestational age do not impact the effectiveness of misoprostol in the treatment of early pregnancy failure. The history of one or more caesarean section (s) significantly decreased the success rate. It has to be confirmed by other studies. This new data can be an aid to decision-making for the patient and the physician in case of early pregnancy failure.

Private medical providers' knowledge and practices concerning medical abortion in Nigeria

To investigate the knowledge and practices regarding medical abortion and postabortion care in northern Nigeria among private physicians--the principal providers of such services in the area--122 doctors operating separate clinics in five states--Bauchi, Borno, Kaduna, Niger, and Taraba--were interviewed by means of a structured questionnaire. The results showed that 22 percent of the doctors reported that they terminate unwanted pregnancies, whereas nearly all reported that they manage complications of unsafe abortion. Manual vacuum aspiration and dilatation and curettage performed singly or in combination were the most common methods of abortion and postabortion care reported by the doctors. Only one doctor reported exclusive use of medical abortion in the first trimester, and three reported its exclusive use in the second trimester. Only 35 percent of the doctors listed misoprostol as a drug that they knew could be used for abortion and postabortion care, and only 12 percent listed mifepristone. By contrast, 49 percent listed inappropriate or dangerous drugs for use in abortion provision in the first and second trimesters of pregnancy. We conclude that private practitioners in northern Nigeria have limited knowledge of medical abortion and postabortion care, and that a capacity-building program on the subject should be instituted for them.

Counseling women with early pregnancy failure: utilizing evidence, preserving preference

OBJECTIVES

To apply principles of shared decision-making to EPF management counseling. To present a patient treatment priority checklist developed from review of available literature on patient priorities for EPF management.

METHODS

Review of evidence for patient preferences; personal, emotional, physical and clinical factors that may influence patient priorities for EPF management; and the clinical factors, resources, and provider bias that may influence current practice.

RESULTS

Women have strong and diverse preferences for EPF management and report higher satisfaction when treated according to these preferences. However, estimates of actual treatment patterns suggest that current practice does not reflect the evidence for safety and acceptability of all options, or patient preferences. Multiple practice barriers and biases exist that may be influencing provider counseling about options for EPF management.

CONCLUSION

Choosing management for EPF is a preference-sensitive decision. A patient-centered approach to EPF management should incorporate counseling about all treatment options.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Providers can integrate a counseling model into EPF management practice that utilizes principles of shared decision-making and an organized method for eliciting patient preferences, priorities, and concerns about treatment options.

Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for the management of missed abortion

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of two routes of misoprostol administration (sublingual and vaginal) for the treatment of missed abortion.

METHODS

Two hundred and twenty women with confirmed missed abortion who received 400 microg/6 h misoprostol either sublingually or vaginally, were included in this randomized control trial. All women were admitted to hospital for follow-up care for 2 days. If the pregnancy was not completely evacuated during this time, the patient underwent immediate surgical completion. Efficacy was defined as the percentage of women discharged from the study without the need for surgical intervention.

RESULTS

The effectiveness was high in the sublingual group and statistically different (sublingual 84.5%, vaginal 46.4% P = 0.000 RR = 0.54 95%CI = 0.442-0.681). The groups differed in terms of complications like bleeding (88.2% vs 65.5%), pain (85.5% vs 56.4%), diarrhea (69.1% vs 36.4%) and fever (23.6% vs 13.3%) in the sublingual group versus the vaginal group, but the mean time to expulsion was shorter (9.68 h SD = 5.51 95%CI = 8.61-10.57) in the sublingual group than the vaginal group (16.64 h SD = 14.01 95%CI = 13.8-19.48), P = 0.000. Women in the sublingual group were highly satisfied with the method.

CONCLUSION

Sublingual misoprostol for the medical management of missed abortion is more effective and more acceptable than the vaginal route. However, it showed more adverse effects.

Evaluation of intravaginal misoprostol for medical management of pregnancies less than 20 weeks of gestation with absent cardiac activity

AIM

To assess the efficacy and side-effects of misoprostol (800 microg used intravaginally) for terminating non-viable pregnancies up to 20 weeks of gestation.

METHODS

Sixty five patients with non-viable pregnancies up to 20 weeks of gestation were given 800 microg misoprostol intravaginally on day 1. A second dose of 800 microg was repeated after 24 h if complete abortion was not attained with one dose. Primary outcome measure was success (defined as complete abortion in 48 h without surgical intervention). Duration and amount of blood loss, fall in hemoglobin, and other side-effects (pain, vomiting, diarrhea, fever and chills) were studied as secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

73.8% of our patients had a gestational age <or=12 weeks (group A) and 26.2% had a gestational age between 12 and 20 weeks (group B). Success rate after one dose was 66.1% and rose to 84.6% after the second dose. Success rate was higher with increasing gestation (81.2% in group A vs 94.1% in group B). Mean induction abortion interval was 18.8 +/- 11.6 h in group A and 10.8 +/- 6.2 h in group B. Mean duration of bleeding was 9.4 +/- 2.3 days. Average blood loss was 134.9 +/- 113.2 mL. No patient required blood transfusion. Mean fall in hemoglobin was 0.56 +/- 0.48 g/dL. Most patients had mild pain. Only 6.2% had severe pain requiring injectable narcotic analgesics. Other side-effects were minimal. Patients who failed to abort completely with misoprostol underwent surgical evacuation.

CONCLUSION

800 microg vaginal misoprostol is an effective regimen for termination of non-viable pregnancies <20 weeks of gestation. It has minimal side-effects and avoids surgical intervention.

Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage (less than 24 weeks)

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining pregnancy tissues in the uterus. However, it has been suggested that drug-based medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for early incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (September 2009).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies (2750 women) were included, there were no studies on women over 13 weeks' gestation. Studies addressed a number of comparisons and data are therefore limited.Three trials compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Nine studies involving 1766 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (four oral, four vaginal, one vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.00, eight studies, 1377 women) with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.18; eight studies, 1538 women) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 6.32, 95% CI 2.90 to 13.77; six studies, 1158 women). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Women experiencing miscarriage at less than 13 weeks should be offered an informed choice.

Medical treatment with misoprostol for early failure of pregnancies after assisted reproductive technology: a promising treatment option

OBJECTIVE

To assess the success rate of misoprostol to induce abortion in early pregnancy failure and to define the factors associated with success of treatment.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

University-affiliated tertiary medical center.

PATIENT(S)

Two hundred twenty women with the diagnosis of blighted ovum or missed abortion with a crown-rump length (CRL) up to 25 mm (<9 w).

INTERVENTION(S)

Treatment protocol included two doses of 800 microg misoprostol given vaginally and orally in intervals of 24 to 72 hours.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Failure was defined as surgical intervention because of retained gestational sac, severe pain or bleeding, or suspected retained products of gestation after menstruation.

RESULT(S)

The treatment was successful in 77.2% (170/220) of the patients. Success rate was 72.5% (121/167) for pregnancies achieved spontaneously and 92.4% (49/53) among women who conceived after assisted reproductive technology (relative risk = 3.65: 95% confidence interval 1.378 to 9.667). Multivariate analysis showed that the risk of failure of medical abortion increased significantly for patients who had had at least five previous pregnancies (of them, three or more abortions) as compared with patients with one or two previous pregnancies only, and for those who conceived spontaneously as compared with pregnancies after ovulation induction.

CONCLUSION(S)

Medical treatment in early missed abortion is recommended especially for women with low gravidity and for those who conceived after assisted reproductive technology.

Contemporary management of early pregnancy failure

Early pregnancy failure is a common pregnancy complication. This paper reviews the terminology, diagnosis, and treatment of early pregnancy failure. Although surgical curettage has been the standard of care for more than 50 years, additional treatment options exist which appear to be satisfactory to patients. Manual vacuum curettage in the office is an effective alternative to electric vacuum curettage in an operating room. Nonsurgical treatments, including expectant and medical management, are reasonable alternatives depending on the clinical situation and the patient's desires. Clinicians need to understand how these options compare to provide appropriate counseling to patients.

The use of misoprostol for early pregnancy failure

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper reviews the current management of early pregnancy failure with particular emphasis on the use of misoprostol.

RECENT FINDINGS

Medical management using misoprostol is effective for the management of miscarriages. The success rate ranged from 84 to 93% depending on the regimen of misoprostol, the duration of waiting period and the types of miscarriage.

SUMMARY

Miscarriages occur in 10 to 20% of all pregnancies. Surgical evacuation has been used to empty the uterus. Recently, medical treatment using misoprostol has been studied for the management of miscarriage. It avoids surgery and its associated complications. Compared to expectant management, the success rate is higher. Nonsurgical management takes a longer period to reach the endpoint and medical management is associated with side effect of medication. Studies have shown that medical management is safe and acceptable to women. The optimal regimen of medical management, however, is yet to be determined.

Medical treatment for early fetal death (less than 24 weeks)

BACKGROUND

In most pregnancies that miscarry, arrest of embryonic or fetal development occurs some time (often weeks) before the miscarriage occurs. Ultrasound examination can reveal abnormal findings during this phase by demonstrating anembryonic pregnancies or embryonic or fetal death. Treatment before 14 weeks has traditionally been surgical but medical treatments may be effective, safe, and acceptable, as may be waiting for spontaneous miscarriage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for early pregnancy failure (anembryonic pregnancies or embryonic and fetal deaths before 24 weeks).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (30 November 2005).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing medical treatment with another treatment (e.g. surgical evacuation), or placebo, or no treatment for early pregnancy failure. Quasi-random studies were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted unblinded.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty four studies (1888 women) were included. Vaginal misoprostol hastens miscarriage (complete or incomplete) when compared with placebo: e.g. miscarriage less than 24 hours (two trials, 138 women, relative risk (RR) 4.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.70 to 8.28), with less need for uterine curettage (two trials, 104 women, RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.60) and no significant increase in nausea or diarrhoea. Lower-dose regimens of vaginal misoprostol tend to be less effective in producing miscarriage (three trials, 247 women, RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.00) with similar incidence of nausea. There seems no clear advantage to administering a 'wet' preparation of vaginal misoprostol or of adding methotrexate, or of using laminaria tents after 14 weeks. Vaginal misoprostol is more effective than vaginal prostaglandin E in avoiding surgical evacuation. Oral misoprostol was less effective than vaginal misoprostol in producing complete miscarriage (two trials, 218 women, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.99). Sublingual misoprostol had equivalent efficacy to vaginal misoprostol in inducing complete miscarriage but was associated with more frequent diarrhoea. The two trials of mifepristone treatment generated conflicting results. There was no statistically significant difference between vaginal misoprostol and gemeprost in the induction of miscarriage for fetal death after 13 weeks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence from randomised trials supports the use of vaginal misoprostol as a medical treatment to terminate non-viable pregnancies before 24 weeks. Further research is required to assess effectiveness and safety, optimal route of administration and dose. Conflicting findings about the value of mifepristone need to be resolved by additional study.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vaginal misoprostol for management of early pregnancy failures

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether misoprostol medical management of early pregnancy failures is more effective than expectant management.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients diagnosed with early pregnancy failures, closed cervix, and minimal vaginal bleeding were randomized to 800 microg of misoprostol or placebo placed vaginally. Patients were evaluated by ultrasound imaging 24 hours and 48 hours after study drug administration, with repeat administration if 24-hour imaging showed a persistent gestational sac. Treatment success was defined as expulsion of uterine contents within 48 hours. Patient follow-up occurred 2 weeks after expulsion of uterine contents.

RESULTS

Treatment success occurred in 15 of 18 (83%) misoprostol patients and 2 of 16 (13%) placebo patients (P < .0001). Side effects were similar between groups except for vaginal bleeding, which was more common in the misoprostol group (P = .001). Patient satisfaction and pain perception were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Misoprostol appears to be highly effective for treating early pregnancy failures, with few side effects and high patient satisfaction.

Long-term reproductive outcome subsequent to medical versus surgical treatment for miscarriage

BACKGROUND

When compared with the conventional surgical evacuation for the treatment of miscarriage, medical evacuation has been largely accepted as an effective and safe management. However, there is a lack of data on the long-term reproductive outcome of these two treatment modalities, which is crucial in patient counselling. The current study evaluates and compares the long-term fertility and pregnancy outcome following these two treatments.

METHODS

A cohort of 604 women enrolled in a previous randomized controlled trial comparing medical and surgical evacuation for miscarriage were followed up prospectively by telephone interview at a median of 6 (range 4-9) years using a structured questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 423 women were contacted and four declined to participate (response rate 69.4%). Of these, 261 women (131 medical and 130 surgical evacuations) had attempted to become pregnant since the miscarriage. There were no differences in their baseline characteristics including age, reproductive and contraceptive history. The natural conception rates were the same (97.7%, P = 0.99) and the cumulative pregnancy rates were similar between groups, being 60 and 80% at 12 and 24 months respectively. The median time-to-pregnancy was 8 months in both groups (P = 0.97) and the subsequent live birth rates (85.2 versus 88.2%, P = 0.72) resulting from the immediate pregnancy following previous treatment were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term conception rate and pregnancy outcome are not different following medical or surgical evacuation for miscarriage. Women should be reassured that their long-term fertility potential will not be compromised after medical treatment.

Expectant, medical, or surgical management of first-trimester miscarriage: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the relative benefits and harms of different management options for first-trimester miscarriage.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register searches (1966 to July 2004), including references of retrieved articles.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials assigning women with first-trimester missed or incomplete miscarriage to surgical, medical, or expectant management were included. Primary outcomes were successful treatment and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included moderate or severe bleeding, blood transfusion, emergency curettage, pelvic inflammatory disease, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Comparisons used the risk difference. Between-study heterogeneity and random effects summary estimates were calculated.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Complete evacuation of the uterus was significantly more common with surgical than medical management (risk difference 32.8%, number needed to treat 3, success rate of medical management 62%) and with medical than expectant management (risk difference 49.7%, number needed to treat 2). Success rate with expectant management was spuriously low (39%) in the latter comparison. Analysis of cases with incomplete miscarriage only showed that medical management still had two thirds the chance to induce complete evacuation compared with surgical management, but it was better than expectant management. Data from studies that evaluated outcome at 48 hours or more after allocation indicated again that medical management had a better success rate than expectant management but a worse success rate than surgical management; expectant management probably had much lower success rates than surgical evacuation, but data were very sparse. Patient satisfaction data were sparse. Moderate or severe bleeding was less common with medical than expectant management (risk difference 3.2%) and possibly surgical management (risk difference 2.1%). There was a considerable amount of missing information, in particular for secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

One additional success can be achieved among 3 women treated surgically rather than medically. Expectant management has had remarkably variable success rates across these studies, depending probably on the type of miscarriage. Greater standardization of outcomes should be a goal of future research.