Efficacy of mifepristone for cervical priming for second-trimester surgical termination of pregnancy

Abortion Care Beyond 13 Weeks' Gestation: A Global Perspective

The majority of abortions are performed early in pregnancy, but later abortion accounts for a large proportion of abortion-related morbidity and mortality. People who need this care are often the most vulnerable-the poor, the young, those who experience violence, and those with significant health issues. In settings with access to safe care, studies demonstrate significant declines in abortion-related morbidity and mortality. This review focuses on evidence-based practices for induced abortion beyond 13 weeks' gestation and post-abortion care in both high- and low-resource settings. We also highlight key programmatic issues to consider when expanding the gestational age for abortion services.

Mifepristone and misoprostol compared to osmotic dilators for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 15-18 weeks' gestation: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

OBJECTIVE

Cervical preparation is recommended prior to second-trimester surgical abortion. Osmotic dilators are an effective means to prepare the cervix, but require an additional procedure and may cause discomfort. We compared cervical preparation with mifepristone and misoprostol to preparation with osmotic dilators.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial was performed to compare cervical preparation with mifepristone and misoprostol to preparation with osmotic dilators in women undergoing surgical abortion between 15 and 18 weeks gestation. The medication group (n=29) received mifepristone 200 mg orally 24 hours prior to uterine evacuation and misoprostol 400 μg buccally 2 hours before the procedure. The dilator group (n=20) underwent osmotic dilator insertion 24 hours prior to the procedure. The primary outcome was total procedure time, from insertion to removal of the speculum. Secondary outcomes included operative time (from intrauterine instrumentation to speculum removal), initial cervical dilation, nausea, pain, ease of procedure, and whether participants would choose the same modality in the future.

RESULTS

For mean total procedure time, medication preparation (14.0 min, 95% CI 12.0-16.1) was not inferior to dilators (14.3 min, 95% CI 11.7 to 16.8, p<0.001). Mean operative time and ease of procedure were also similar between groups. More women in the medication group than the dilator group would prefer to use the same method in the future (86% vs 30%, p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

Prior to surgical abortion at 15-18 weeks, use of mifepristone and misoprostol did not result in longer procedure times than overnight osmotic dilators.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01462.

The combination route versus sublingual and vaginal misoprostol for the termination of 13 to 24 week pregnancies: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to compare the effectiveness of misoprostol via sublingual and vaginal administration versus the combination route in the termination of 13 to 24 week pregnancies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and ninety-five patients, divided into three groups, were enrolled in this study. In the vaginal group, two 200-μg misoprostol tablets were inserted into the posterior fornix every 4 hours for 48 hours. In the sublingual group, patients took two 200-μg misoprostol tablets every 4 hours for up to 48 hours. In the combination group, two 200-μg misoprostol tablets were inserted within the posterior fornix followed by the administration of 400 μg misoprostol sublingually every 4 hours for a period of 48 hours. Efficacy was defined as a successful termination without the need for any interventions.

RESULTS

The success rate, after 24-48 hours, was not significantly different among the three groups. It was significantly higher within the first 12 hours of misoprostol administration within the sublingual group (p = 0.031). Nonetheless, the overall failure rate was not significantly different between three groups. The mean duration of abortion was shortest among the sublingual group (655 ± 46 minutes), p = 0.005, and the number of misoprostol tablets administered was lower when compared to the other groups (5.9 ± 0.3), p = 0.001. The duration of abortion and the number of misoprostol tablets used significantly varied in the cases in which the patient had a history of a previous normal vaginal delivery (NVD; p = 0.007). The average number of tablets administered was the lowest in the sublingual group. The prevalence of fever among the NVD cases were significantly higher in the combination group (p = 0.008). Overall, of all the methods, patients preferred the sublingual route (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Sublingual misoprostol has a higher efficacy when compared to the vaginal and combination methods.

Misoprostol 1 to 3 h preprocedure vs. overnight osmotic dilators prior to early second-trimester surgical abortion

OBJECTIVES

We sought to compare the effectiveness of at least 1 h of 400 mcg of buccal misoprostol to overnight osmotic dilators for early second-trimester surgical abortion cervical preparation.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study, reviewing 145 consecutive charts to compare procedure duration for women who received 400 mcg of buccal misoprostol at least 1 h preprocedure vs. overnight osmotic dilators before dilation and evacuation between 14 weeks, 0 days and 15 weeks, 6 days' gestation. Primary outcome was procedure duration and secondary outcomes included maximum mechanical dilator size, estimated blood loss and side effects.

RESULTS

Sixty-four women (44.1%) received buccal misoprostol (mean 1.6 h), and 81 women (55.9%) received overnight osmotic dilators. Groups did not differ regarding mean gestational age or gynecologic history. All procedures in both groups were completed. Procedure duration was not significantly different between the misoprostol and osmotic dilator groups (median 11.0 min vs. 10.0 min, p=.22), even after multivariable linear regression (p=.17). The mean total cervical preparation duration was 1.6 h for women in the misoprostol group compared to 20.3 h in the osmotic dilator group (p<.001). Secondary outcomes did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that at least 1 h of preprocedure misoprostol decreased the duration of cervical preparation for early second-trimester procedures performed by an experienced surgeon.

IMPLICATIONS

In this small, retrospective review, at least 1 h of preprocedure buccal misoprostol decreased the duration from cervical preparation initiation to procedure completion in early second-trimester procedures performed by an experienced surgeon. These results should be considered as a pilot evaluation, and further prospective study is needed to further clarify whether this short interval could be applied in general practice.