Two regimens of misoprostol for treatment of incomplete abortion

Telemedicine for the provision of medication abortion to pregnant people at up to twelve weeks of pregnancy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine represents an important strategy to facilitate access to medication abortion (MAB) procedures, reduces distance barriers and expands coverage to underserved communities. The aim is evaluating the self-managed MAB (provided through telemedicine as the sole intervention or in comparison to in-person care) in pregnant people at up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane (Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews), LILACS, SciELO, and Google Scholar. The search was based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Design (PICOS) framework, and was not restricted to any years of publication, and studies could be published in English or Spanish. Study screening and selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction were performed by peer reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated with RoB 2.0 and ROBIS-I. A narrative and descriptive synthesis of the results was conducted. Meta-analyses with random-effects models were performed using Review Manager version 5.4 to calculate pooled risk differences, along with their individual 95% confidence intervals. The rate of evidence certainty was based on GRADE recommendations.

RESULTS

21 articles published between 2011 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria. Among them, 20 were observational studies, and 1 was a randomized clinical trial. Regarding the risk of bias, 5 studies had a serious risk, 15 had a moderate risk, and 1 had an undetermined risk. In terms of the type of intervention, 7 compared telemedicine to standard care. The meta-analysis of effectiveness revealed no statistically significant differences between the two modalities of care (RD = 0.01; 95%CI 0.00, 0.02). Our meta-analyses show that there were no significant differences in the occurrence of adverse events or in patient satisfaction when comparing the two methods of healthcare delivery.

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine is an effective and viable alternative for MAB, similar to standard care. The occurrence of complications was low in both forms of healthcare delivery. Telemedicine services are an opportunity to expand access to safe abortion services.

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.

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.

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.

Postabortion Care: 20 Years of Strong Evidence on Emergency Treatment, Family Planning, and Other Programming Components

Worldwide 75 million women need postabortion care (PAC) services each year following safe or unsafe induced abortions and miscarriages. We reviewed more than 550 studies on PAC published between 1994 and 2013 in the peer-reviewed and gray literature, covering emergency treatment, postabortion family planning, organization of services, and related topics that impact practices and health outcomes, particularly in the Global South. In this article, we present findings from studies with strong evidence that have major implications for programs and practice. For example, vacuum aspiration reduced morbidity, costs, and time in comparison to sharp curettage. Misoprostol 400 mcg sublingually or 600 mcg orally achieved 89% to 99% complete evacuation rates within 2 weeks in multiple studies and was comparable in effectiveness, safety, and acceptability to manual vacuum aspiration. Misoprostol was safely introduced in several PAC programs through mid-level providers, extending services to secondary hospitals and primary health centers. In multiple studies, postabortion family planning uptake before discharge increased by 30-70 percentage points within 1-3 years of strengthening postabortion family planning services; in some cases, increases up to 60 percentage points in 4 months were achieved. Immediate postabortion contraceptive acceptance increased on average from 32% before the interventions to 69% post-intervention. Several studies found that women receiving immediate postabortion intrauterine devices and implants had fewer unintended pregnancies and repeat abortions than those who were offered delayed insertions. Postabortion family planning is endorsed by the professional organizations of obstetricians/gynecologists, midwives, and nurses as a standard of practice; major donors agree, and governments should be encouraged to provide universal access to postabortion family planning. Important program recommendations include offering all postabortion women family planning counseling and services before leaving the facility, especially because fertility returns rapidly (within 2 to 3 weeks); postabortion family planning services can be quickly replicated to multiple sites with high acceptance rates. Voluntary family planning uptake by method should always be monitored to document program and provider performance. In addition, vacuum aspiration and misoprostol should replace sharp curettage to treat incomplete abortion for women who meet eligibility criteria.

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.

Expectant care versus surgical treatment for miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage is a common complication of early pregnancy that can have both medical and psychological consequences such as depression and anxiety. The need for routine surgical evacuation with miscarriage has been questioned because of potential complications such as cervical trauma, uterine perforation, hemorrhage, or infection.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and effectiveness of expectant management versus surgical treatment for early pregnancy failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (9 February 2012), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 4 of 4), PubMed (2005 to 11 January 2012), POPLINE (inception to 11 January 2012), LILACS (2005 to 11 January 2012) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials comparing expectant care and surgical treatment (vacuum aspiration or dilation and curettage) for miscarriage were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. For dichotomous data, we calculated the Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we computed the mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. We entered additional data such as medians into 'Other data' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials with 1521 participants in this review. The expectant-care group was more likely to have an incomplete miscarriage by two weeks (RR 3.98; 95% CI 2.94 to 5.38) or by six to eight weeks (RR 2.56; 95% CI 1.15 to 5.69). The need for unplanned surgical treatment was greater for the expectant-care group (RR 7.35; 95% CI 5.04 to 10.72). The mean percentage needing surgical management in the expectant-care group was 28%, while 4% of the surgical-treatment group needed additional surgery. The expectant-care group had more days of bleeding (MD 1.59; 95% CI 0.74 to 2.45). Further, more of the expectant-care group needed transfusion (RR 6.45; 95% CI 1.21 to 34.42). The mean percentage needing blood transfusion was 1.4% for expectant care compared with none for surgical management. Results were mixed for pain. Diagnosis of infection was similar for the two groups (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.36 to 1.12), as were results for various psychological outcomes. Pregnancy data were limited. Costs were lower for the expectant-care group (MD -499.10; 95% CI -613.04 to -385.16; in UK pounds sterling).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Expectant management led to a higher risk of incomplete miscarriage, need for unplanned (or additional) surgical emptying of the uterus, bleeding and need for transfusion. Risk of infection and psychological outcomes were similar for both groups. Costs were lower for expectant management. Given the lack of clear superiority of either approach, the woman's preference should be important in decision making. Pharmacological ('medical') management has added choices for women and their clinicians and has been examined in other reviews.

Comparison of efficacy of modified electric vacuum aspiration with sharp curettage for the treatment of incomplete abortion: randomized controlled trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of modified electric vacuum aspiration (mEVA) and sharp curettage (SC) for treatment of incomplete abortion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted between 1 March 2005 and 15 December 2009. Ninety-four women with incomplete abortion were randomly allocated into two groups, group A (n = 47) underwent mEVA and group B (n=47) underwent SC. The procedures were performed using the paracervical block with 20 mL of lidocaine. Successful management and complication were assessed. Successful management was defined as complete uterine evacuation with no need for the second surgical procedure.

RESULTS

There were differences in women characteristics between groups. The successful rate of management was 100% for both groups. However, the operative time and estimated blood loss were less in the mEVA group than in the SC group. Severe pain was significantly less prevalent in group A than group B. Suspected endometritis was found in two (4.3%) patients in each group.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of mEVA was the same as that of SC in successful management of incomplete abortion, but pain was experienced more often in the SC group.

A randomized controlled trial of 400-μg sublingual misoprostol versus manual vacuum aspiration for the treatment of incomplete abortion in two Egyptian hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety, efficacy, and acceptability of 400-μg sublingual misoprostol with that of manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) in 2 Egyptian hospitals.

METHODS

Participating women were randomized to either MVA or misoprostol treatment for incomplete abortion. The primary outcome, complete uterine evacuation, was determined 1 week later, as were adverse effects, change in hemoglobin, acceptability, and satisfaction.

RESULTS

Complete uterine evacuation was achieved in 98.3% of women who received misoprostol and 99.7% who underwent MVA (relative risk [RR] 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-1.00). A decrease in hemoglobin of 2g/dL or more was comparably rare in the 2 groups (0.3% misoprostol vs 0.9% MVA; RR 0.34 [95% CI, 0.04-3.21]). Mean change in hemoglobin was also clinically similar (-0.5 g/dL misoprostol vs -0.4 g/dL MVA; P<0.01). Heavy bleeding was rare (2.4% misoprostol vs 1.6% MVA; RR 1.55 [95% CI, 0.51-4.68]) following treatment. Nearly all women (96.8% misoprostol vs 98.3% MVA) were satisfied with their treatment but those who received misoprostol were significantly more likely to prefer that method in the future (81.9% vs 62.8%; RR 1.30 [95% CI, 1.19-1.43]).

CONCLUSION

The high efficacy, safety, and acceptability of 400-μg sublingual misoprostol indicate that it is analogous to surgery as a first-line treatment for incomplete abortion. Misoprostol might improve post-abortion care when resources are limited and surgical treatment is unavailable.

Oral misoprostol as an alternative to surgical management for incomplete abortion in Ghana

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether 600-μg oral misoprostol is an effective alternative to manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) for the treatment of incomplete abortion.

METHODS

From June 16, 2004, to July 20, 2005, 230 women of reproductive age presenting with incomplete abortion were randomized in an open-label trial to either 600-μg oral misoprostol or MVA for the treatment of incomplete abortion.

RESULTS

Regardless of the assigned method, more than 98% of participants experienced complete uterine evacuation following initial treatment. Efficacy, acceptability, and satisfaction ratings were similar and high for both methods.

CONCLUSION

600-μg oral misoprostol is a safe, effective, and acceptable alternative to MVA for the treatment of incomplete abortion.

Comparative study between oral and sublingual 600 µg misoprostol for the treatment of incomplete abortion

AIM

To evaluate and compare effectiveness, side effects and patient acceptability between oral and sublingual 600 µg misoprostol for the treatment of incomplete abortion.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted. Pregnant women of less than 14 weeks gestation, diagnosed with incomplete abortion, were randomly assigned to receive 600 µg misoprostol orally or sublingually. The patients were evaluated at 48 h after drug administration for complete abortion.

RESULTS

A total of 64 women were recruited to the study (32 in the oral group and 32 in the sublingual group). The complete abortion rate was not statistically different between oral and sublingual groups (87.5% versus 84.4%, P > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in side effects and satisfaction rate. Fever/chills were the most common side effects.

CONCLUSION

Both sublingual and oral 600 µg misoprostol are useful for the management of incomplete abortion. Side effects and satisfaction rates are not different. Thus, these methods may be used as alternative treatments of incomplete abortion.

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.

Two routes of administration for misoprostol in the treatment of incomplete abortion: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This study was conducted to compare the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of 400 mcg sublingual misoprostol and 600 mcg oral misoprostol for treatment of incomplete abortion.

STUDY DESIGN

We used an open-label randomized controlled trial conducted from July 2005 to August 2006 in a large tertiary level maternity hospital in Antananarivo, Madagascar, and a large tertiary level hospital in Chisinau, Moldova. Three hundred consenting women seeking treatment for clinically diagnosed incomplete abortion with uterine size <or=12 weeks since last menstrual period were randomized to misoprostol either 600 mcg orally or 400 mcg sublingually. The primary outcome measure was the complete resolution of clinical signs and symptoms of incomplete abortion without need for surgical intervention. Women were seen for follow-up on Day 7 and, if necessary, on Day 14 to assess abortion status. The study was powered to detect a 7% difference in efficacy with a total of 142 women required in each arm.

RESULTS

Efficacy rates were 94.6% and 94.5%, for the oral and sublingual routes, respectively (RR: 1.00, 95% CI=0.95-1.06, p=.98). At 1 week follow-up, more than 80% of women had completed abortions (77.8% oral and 84.8% sublingual, p=.12). Mean pain scores were 2.95 and 3.04, respectively, for the oral and sublingual groups. Side effects included abdominal pain, bleeding, headaches and dizziness/weakness with no differences reported between the two groups. Acceptability and satisfaction were high for both routes and women indicated a preference for medical versus surgical treatment if ever needed in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

Both treatment regimens were very effective. Four hundred micrograms of sublingual misoprostol and 600 mcg oral misoprostol appear to have similar safety and effectiveness profiles when used for the treatment of incomplete abortion. A lower 400-mcg misoprostol dose may provide an alternative treatment option as well as have potential benefits in terms of cost.

Treatment of incomplete abortion and miscarriage with misoprostol

A literature review was conducted to determine whether misoprostol is an effective treatment for incomplete abortion and, if so, to recommend an appropriate regimen. All English language articles published before October 2007 using misoprostol in at least one of the study arms were reviewed to determine the efficacy of misoprostol when used to treat incomplete abortion in the first trimester. All available unpublished data previously presented at international scientific meetings were also reviewed. Sufficient evidence was found in support of misoprostol as a safe and effective means of non-surgical uterine evacuation. A single dose of misoprostol 600 microg oral is recommended for treatment of incomplete abortion in women presenting with a uterine size equivalent to 12 weeks gestation.

Misoprostol for treatment of incomplete abortion at the regional hospital level: results from Tanzania

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety, efficacy, and acceptability of misoprostol versus manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) for treatment of incomplete abortion.

DESIGN

A prospective open-label randomised trial.

SETTING

Kagera Regional Hospital, Bukoba, Tanzania.

SAMPLE

Three hundred women with a clinical diagnosis of incomplete abortion and a uterine size <12 weeks.

METHODS

A total of 150 women were randomised to either a single dose of 600 micrograms of oral misoprostol or MVA. If abortion was clinically complete at 7-day follow up, the woman was released from the study. If it was still incomplete, the woman was offered the choice of an additional 1-week follow up or immediate MVA. Cases still incomplete after a further week were offered MVA.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence of successful abortion (success defined as no secondary surgical intervention provided), incidence of adverse effects, patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Success was very high in both arms (misoprostol: 99%; MVA: 100%; difference not significant). Most adverse effects were higher in the misoprostol arm, although the mean pain score was higher in the MVA arm (3.0 versus 3.5; P < 0.001). More women were very satisfied with misoprostol (75%) than with MVA (55%, P = 0.001), and a higher proportion of women in the misoprostol arm said that they would recommend the treatment to a friend (95% versus 75%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Misoprostol is as effective as MVA at treating incomplete abortion at uterine size of <12 weeks. The acceptability of misoprostol appears higher. Given the many practical advantages of misoprostol over MVA in low-resource settings, misoprostol should be more widely available for treatment of incomplete abortion in the developing world.

Is misoprostol a safe, effective and acceptable alternative to manual vacuum aspiration for postabortion care? Results from a randomised trial in Burkina Faso, West Africa

OBJECTIVES

Previous research has demonstrated the effectiveness of misoprostol for treatment of incomplete abortion; however, few studies have systematically compared misoprostol's effectiveness with that of standard surgical care. This study documents the effectiveness of a single 600 micrograms dose of oral misoprostol versus manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) for treatment of incomplete abortion in a developing country setting.

DESIGN

Open-label randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Two university teaching hospitals in Burkina Faso, West Africa.

POPULATION

Women of reproductive age presenting with incomplete abortion.

METHODS

From April 2004 through October 2004, 447 consenting women with incomplete abortion were randomised to either a single dose of 600 micrograms oral misoprostol or MVA for treatment of their condition.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Completed abortion following initial treatment.

RESULTS

Regardless of treatment assigned, nearly all participants had a complete uterine evacuation (misoprostol = 94.5%, MVA = 99.1%; relative risk [RR] = 0.95 [95% CI 0.92-0.99]). Acceptability and satisfaction ratings were similar and high for both misoprostol and MVA, with three out of four women indicating that the treatment's adverse effects were tolerable (misoprostol = 72.9%, MVA = 75.8%; RR = 0.96 [95% CI 0.86-1.07]). The majority of women were 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' with the method they received (misoprostol = 96.8%, MVA = 97.7%; RR = 0.99 [95% CI 0.96-1.02]), expressed a desire to choose that method again (misoprostol = 94.5%, MVA = 86.6%; RR = 1.09 [95% CI 1.03-1.16]) and to recommend it to a friend (misoprostol = 94.5%, MVA = 85.2%; RR = 1.11 [95% CI 1.04-1.18]).

CONCLUSION

Six hundred micrograms of oral misoprostol is as safe and acceptable as MVA for the treatment of incomplete abortion. Operations research is needed to ascertain the role of misoprostol within postabortion care programmes worldwide.

Comparison of misoprostol and manual vacuum aspiration for the treatment of incomplete abortion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety, efficacy, and acceptability of misoprostol versus manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) for treatment of incomplete abortion in Maputo, Mozambique.

METHODS

A total of 270 women with clinically diagnosed incomplete abortions of up to 12 weeks of gestation were randomized to either 600 mug oral misoprostol or MVA. Women were followed-up seven days later to evaluate whether the abortion was complete.

RESULTS

Success was high for both MVA and misoprostol groups (100% vs 91%, P=0.002). Women in the MVA arm reported fewer side effects but higher pain scores. Women who received misoprostol were significantly more likely to be "very satisfied" with the treatment and willing to choose the method again.

CONCLUSION

Although oral misoprostol was less effective than MVA in this study, it was more acceptable to women. Misoprostol is well-suited for use in low-resource settings, and should be promoted as an option for the treatment of incomplete abortion.

Bleeding patterns after misoprostol vs surgical treatment of early pregnancy failure: results from a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to describe bleeding patterns after misoprostol or curettage for early pregnancy failure (EPF).

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized trial that included women (n = 652) with EPF. Participants were assigned to vaginal misoprostol (800 microg) or curettage in a 3:1 ratio. Participants completed a bleeding diary. We measured hemoglobin levels at baseline and 2 weeks after the treatment.

RESULTS

Decreases in hemoglobin levels were greater after misoprostol (-0.7 g/dL; SD, 1.2) than curettage (-0.2 g/dL; SD, 0.9; P < .001). Large changes in hemoglobin levels (at least 2 g/dL) or low nadir hemoglobin levels (< 10 g/dL) were more frequent after misoprostol (55/428 women; 12.8%) than after curettage (6/135 women; 4.4%; P = .02). More participants in the misoprostol group reported "any bleeding" or "heavy bleeding" every study day. Four women who were treated with misoprostol required blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

Bleeding is heavier and more prolonged after medical treatment with misoprostol than with curettage for EPF; however, bleeding rarely requires intervention.

Misoprostol alone for early abortion: an evaluation of seven potential regimens

INTRODUCTION

A growing body of literature has shown that misoprostol alone could be effective for early medical abortion. We evaluated seven potential regimens in women up to 56 days of gestation in order to potentially identify an optimal regimen.

METHODS

In phase I of the study, women requesting early abortion were randomized to one of three misoprostol regimens (4x400 microg po every 3 h, 2x800 microg po every 6 h, 1x600 pv microg); in phase II, women were randomized to one of two regimens (2x800 microg po every 3 h, 1x800 pv microg). In phase III, we consecutively tested two regimens (800 microg pv wetted with saline repeated after 24 h if intact gestational sac, 2x800 microg pv wetted with saline) to validate previously published results.

RESULTS

Although most women experienced some side effects, all regimens were tolerable and acceptable. Five of the seven regimens resulted in complete abortion rates of 60% or less. Only repeated doses of 800 microg pv misoprostol resulted in efficacy exceeding 60%.

DISCUSSION

Misoprostol-alone abortion regimens using oral misoprostol are too ineffective for clinical use or further investigation. Regimens with repeated dosing of misoprostol 800 microg pv warrant further study to find the optimal treatment protocol.

Expectant care versus surgical treatment for miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Miscarriage is a common complication of early pregnancy that can have both medical and psychological consequences like depression and anxiety. The need for routine surgical evacuation with miscarriage has been questioned because of potential complications such as cervical trauma, uterine perforation, hemorrhage, or infection.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and effectiveness of expectant management versus surgical treatment for early pregnancy loss.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (December 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 3), PubMed (1966 to March 2005), POPLINE (inception to March 2005), and LILACS (1982 to March 2005) and reference lists of reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials comparing expectant care and surgical treatment (vacuum aspiration or dilation and curettage (D & C)) for miscarriage were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Five trials were included in this review with 689 total participants. The expectant-care group was more likely to have an incomplete miscarriage (RR 5.37; 95% CI 2.57 to 11.22). However, the time frames for declaring the process incomplete varied across the studies. The need for unplanned surgical treatment (such as vacuum aspiration or D&C) was greater for the expectant-care group (RR 4.78; 95% CI 1.99 to 11.48). The expectant-care group had more days of bleeding (WMD 1.59; 95% CI 0.74 to 2.45) and a greater amount of bleeding (WMD 1.00; 95% CI 0.60 to 1.40). Post-procedure diagnosis of infection was lower in the expectant-care group (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.87). Information on psychological outcomes and pregnancy was too limited to draw conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Expectant management led to a higher risk of incomplete miscarriage, need for surgical emptying of the uterus, and bleeding. None of these were serious. In contrast, surgical evacuation was associated with a significantly higher risk of infection. Given the lack of clear superiority of either approach, the woman's preference should play a dominant role in decision making. Medical management has added choices for women and their clinicians, but these were not reviewed here.

A randomized controlled study comparing 600 versus 1,200 microg oral misoprostol for medical management of incomplete abortion

OBJECTIVES

Although a number of studies have shown misoprostol's promise as a nonsurgical treatment for incomplete abortion, few have systematically examined treatment protocols. This study documents the effectiveness of 600 versus 1,200 microg oral misoprostol for this indication.

METHODS

From May 2002 to January 2003, 300 women with incomplete abortion were recruited at a large tertiary facility in Vietnam and randomized to either a single-dose (600 microg) or a repeated-dose (600 microg x 2) regimen of oral misoprostol for the treatment of their condition.

RESULTS

Misoprostol effectively evacuated the uterus for nearly all women (94.6%; n=279), with most reporting bleeding for 4 days (+/-2.3) and pain/cramps lasting 1 day (+/-1.0). Women indicated that the side effects were tolerable (96%) and that their experience was satisfactory (95%).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral misoprostol (600 or 1,200 microg) offers a safe, effective and acceptable treatment for incomplete abortion. Larger studies to assess the advantages and disadvantages of misoprostol as compared with standard surgical care are needed to assess its role in postabortion care programs worldwide.

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.