Preoperative effects of mifepristone for dilation and evacuation after 19 weeks of gestation: a randomised controlled trial

Comparing transcervical balloon with osmotic dilators for cervical preparation prior to procedural abortion: A noninferiority randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare cervical preparation with transcervical balloon to osmotic dilators for second-trimester procedural abortions.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed an unblinded, randomized, noninferiority trial of people undergoing second-trimester procedural abortion at 18 + 0 to 23 + 6 weeks' gestation. We randomized participants to either overnight osmotic dilators (Dilapan-S) or transcervical balloon (Foley). Both groups received overnight mifepristone and preprocedural misoprostol. We powered the study on mean difference in procedure duration, a noninferiority limit of 5 minutes. We compared preprocedure cervical dilation and the need for additional dilation and, using a 100-point visual analog scale, measured physician satisfaction and ease of procedure, and participant pain and satisfaction.

RESULTS

We recruited 32 participants at a single academic center. Although procedure time (minutes) was similar (balloon: 22.6 ± 8.9 vs Dilapan-S: 22.4 ± 12.8, p = 0.96), noninferiority was not met (mean difference, 0.2 minutes; 95% CI, -7.8 to 8.2). Cervical dilation >2 cm was more likely after Dilapan-S (100% vs 62.5%, p = 0.02). Placement was well tolerated with similar time (minutes) for insertion (balloon: 4.8 ± 1.0, Dilapan-S: 5.1 ± 2.3, p = 0.64) and maximum pain (median) with insertion (balloon 39 [5-78], Dilapan-S: 39 [0-100], p = 0.92). Pain immediately postinsertion was higher for Dilapan-S (33 [0-100] vs 18 [0-50], p = 0.046) and similar for maximum pain overnight, participant satisfaction, and likelihood to recommend. Complications were minor and similar between groups (p = 0.60).

CONCLUSION

While significantly more people with transcervical balloon required mechanical dilation, the difference in operative time was clinically negligible. The transcervical balloon was well tolerated and acceptable by participants.

IMPLICATIONS

Clinicians experienced in mechanical dilation may consider a transcervical balloon as a lower-cost tool for second-trimester abortion cervical preparation.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05099991.

Society of Family Planning Clinical Recommendation: Management of hemorrhage at the time of abortion

Hemorrhage after abortion is rare, occurring in fewer than 1% of abortions, but associated morbidity may be significant. Although medication abortion is associated with more bleeding than procedural abortion, overall bleeding for the two methods is minimal and not clinically different. Hemorrhage can be caused by atony, coagulopathy, and abnormal placentation, as well as by such procedure complications as perforation, cervical laceration, and retained tissue. Evidence for practices around postabortion hemorrhage is extremely limited. The Society of Family Planning recommends preoperative identification of individuals at high risk of hemorrhage as well as development of an organized approach to treatment. Specifically, individuals with a uterine scar and complete placenta previa seeking abortion at gestations after the first trimester should be evaluated for placenta accreta spectrum. For those at high risk of hemorrhage, referral to a higher-acuity center should be considered. We propose an algorithm for treating postabortion hemorrhage as follows: (1) assessment and examination, (2) uterine massage and medical therapy, (3) resuscitative measures with laboratory evaluation and possible reaspiration or balloon tamponade, and (4) interventions such as embolization and surgery. Evidence supports the use of oxytocin as prophylaxis for bleeding with dilation and evacuation; methylergonovine prophylaxis, however, is associated with more bleeding at the time of dilation and evacuation. Future research is needed on tranexamic acid as prophylaxis and treatment and misoprostol as prophylaxis. Structural inequities contribute to bleeding risk. Acknowledging how our policies hinder or remedy health inequities is essential when developing new guidelines and approaches to clinical services.

Cervical preparation for second-trimester procedural abortion

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the evidence-informed options for cervical preparation prior to second-trimester dilation and evacuation (D&E).

RECENT FINDINGS

As abortion restrictions increase and the number of abortion clinics and providers decreases, pregnant people are facing more barriers to abortion access. Those in need are now often required to travel for second-trimester abortion care, only to be faced with additional restrictions, such as mandatory waiting periods. Cervical preparation is recommended prior to D&E and takes time for effect. Given the increasing time required to obtain an abortion, patients and providers may prefer same-day cervical preparation to decrease the total time required. Options for same-day cervical preparation include misoprostol alone with single or serial doses, and misoprostol combined with osmotic dilators or transcervical balloon (Foley catheter). Same-day preparation may require additional clinical space to accommodate people after initiation of cervical preparation to manage side-effects and timing of the abortion. Overnight options are also used and more frequently later in the second trimester. Overnight options include mifepristone, osmotic dilators, and transcervical balloon and are often combined with same-day misoprostol. Medication alone preparation is well tolerated and effective in the second trimester, with the addition of mechanical methods with advancing gestation. With many options and combinations being safe and effective, providers can be dynamic and alter approach with supply shortages, adjust to different clinical settings, consider patient medical and surgical factors, and accommodate provider and patient preferences.

SUMMARY

Multiple pharmacologic and mechanical options have been shown to be safe and effective for cervical preparation prior to D&E. Consideration for multiple factors should influence the method of cervical preparation and methods may vary by patient, provider and setting.

Mifepristone prior to osmotic dilators for dilation and evacuation cervical preparation: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate mifepristone impact on osmotic dilator placement and procedural outcomes when given 18 to 24 hours before dilator placement for dilation and evacuation (D&E) at 18 weeks 0 days to 23 weeks 6 days gestation.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial from April 2019 through February 2021, enrolling participants undergoing osmotic dilator (Dilapan) placement for a planned, next-day D&E. Participants took mifepristone 200 mg or placebo orally 18 to 24 hours before dilator placement. We used a gestational age-based protocol for minimum number of dilators. Our primary outcome was the proportion of participants for whom 2 or more additional dilators could be placed compared to the minimum gestational age-based standard. We secondarily evaluated cervical dilation after dilator removal in the operating room, subjective procedure ease, and complication rates (cervical laceration, uterine perforation, blood transfusion, infection, hospitalization, or extramural delivery).

RESULTS

Of the planned 66 participants, we enrolled 44 (stopped due to coronavirus disease 2019-related obstacles), and 41 (19 mifepristone; 22 placebo) completed the study. We placed 2 or more additional dilators compared to standard in 7 (36.8%) and 3 (13.6%) participants after mifepristone and placebo, respectively (p = 0.14). We measured greater median initial cervical dilation in the mifepristone (3.2 cm[2.6-3.6]) compared to placebo (2.6 cm[2.2-3.0]) group, p = 0.03. Surgeon's perception of procedure being "easy" (8/19[42.1] vs 9/22[40.9], respectively, p = 1.00) and complication rate (3/19[15.8%] vs 3/22[13.6], respectively, p = 1.00) did not differ.

CONCLUSION

Our underpowered study did not demonstrate a difference in cervical dilator placement, but mifepristone 18 to 24 hours prior to dilators increases cervical dilation without increasing complications.

IMPLICATIONS

Mifepristone 18 to 24 hours prior to cervical dilator placement may be a useful adjunct to cervical dilators based on increased cervical dilation at time of procedure; however, logistical barriers, such as an additional visit, may preclude routine adoption without definite clinical benefit.

Cervical priming before surgical abortion between 14 and 24 weeks: a systematic review and meta-analyses for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-new clinical guidelines for England

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the optimal cervical priming regimen before surgical abortion between 14⁺⁰ and 24⁺⁰ weeks' gestation.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for publications up to February 2020. Experts were consulted for any ongoing or missed trials.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials, published in English after 1985, that compared (1) mifepristone, misoprostol, and osmotic dilators against each other, alone or in combination; (2) different doses of mifepristone and misoprostol; (3) different intervals between priming and abortion; or (4) different routes of administration of misoprostol were included.

METHODS

Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration checklist for randomized controlled trials, and data were meta-analyzed in Review Manager 5.3. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed as risk ratios using the Mantel-Haenszel method, and continuous outcomes were analyzed as mean differences using the inverse variance method. Fixed effects models were used when there was no significant heterogeneity (I²<50%), random effects models were used for moderate heterogeneity (I²≤50% and <80%), and evidence was not pooled when there was high heterogeneity (I²≥80%). Subgroup analyses were undertaken based on parity where available. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 15 randomized controlled trials (N=2454) were included and showed decreased difficulty of procedure and/or increased cervical dilation and decreased patient acceptability with regimens that included dilators compared with those that did not include dilators; increased preoperative expulsion of the pregnancy with sublingual misoprostol and mifepristone compared with sublingual misoprostol alone; increased difficulty of procedure with dilators and misoprostol compared with dilators and mifepristone; decreased difficulty of procedure with dilators and mifepristone compared with dilators alone; and increased cervical dilation when dilators were placed the day before abortion compared with the same day.

CONCLUSION

Considered alongside clinical expertise, the published data support the use of osmotic dilators, misoprostol, or mifepristone before abortion for pregnancies at 14⁺⁰ to 16⁺⁰ weeks' gestation; osmotic dilators or misoprostol for pregnancies at 16⁺¹ to 19⁺⁰ weeks' gestation; and osmotic dilators alone or with mifepristone for pregnancies at 19⁺¹ to 24⁺⁰ weeks' gestation. The effectiveness of pharmacologic agents alone beyond 16⁺⁰ weeks' gestation and the optimal timing of dilator placement remain important questions for future research.

Society of Family Planning clinical recommendations: Cervical preparation for dilation and evacuation at 20-24 weeks' gestation

Although only 1.3% of abortions in the United States are between 20 and 24 weeks' gestation, these procedures are associated with elevated risks of morbidity and mortality. Adequate cervical preparation before dilation and evacuation (D&E) at 20-24 weeks' gestation reduces procedural risk. For this gestational range, at least one day of cervical preparation with osmotic dilators is recommended before D&E. The use of overnight osmotic dilators alone is sufficient for most D&Es at 20-24 weeks' gestation. Dilapan-S® dilators require a shorter time to achieve maximum dilation, may be more effective than laminaria and may increase the likelihood of success on the first D&E attempt. The use of adjunctive mifepristone administered one-day pre-operatively at the time of osmotic dilator placement, should be considered because evidence demonstrates that it makes D&E subjectively easier at 20-24 weeks without increasing side effects. While older studies suggest that two-days of serial osmotic dilators provide greater dilation than one day of dilators, adjunctive mifepristone may be comparable to a second day of dilators. Adjunctive misoprostol administered on the day of D&E does not appear to affect initial cervical dilation and procedure time and compared with mifepristone is associated with more side effects, such as pain and nausea. Using overnight mifepristone and same-day misoprostol without osmotic dilators at 20-24 weeks' gestation lengthens D&E procedure time and appears to increase immediate complications, at least among less experienced providers. Some evidence shows the feasibility of same-day cervical preparation before D&E at 20-24 weeks using Dilapan-S® with adjunctive misoprostol or serial repeat dosing of misoprostol, but same-day preparation should be limited to providers with significant experience with these regimens. The Society of Family Planning recommends preoperative cervical preparation before D&E at 20-24 weeks' gestation. Further studies are needed to clarify the best means of preparing the cervix in order to minimize abortion complications and improve outcomes in this gestational range.

Surgical or medical abortion of pregnancies between 13+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation? A systematic review and new NICE national guidelines

BACKGROUND

Abortion in the second trimester may be performed surgically or medically. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the effectiveness, safety and acceptability/satisfaction of surgical compared with medical abortion of pregnancy between 13+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation for a new national guideline.

METHODS

We searched Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Library on 4 March 2019. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs; any size) and non-randomised comparative studies with n≥100 in each arm, published in English from 1985. Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration checklist for RCTs. Meta-analysis of risk ratios (RRs)used the Mantel-Haenszel method. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

RESULTS

Two RCTs (n=140) were included. 'Incomplete abortion requiring surgical intervention' was clinically significantly higher with medical than surgical methods (RR=4.58, 95% CI 1.07 to 19.64). 'Abortion completed by the intended method' was statistically, but not clinically, significantly lower after medical than surgical methods, but was marked by high between-study heterogeneity (RR=0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98). To the extent that 'haemorrhage requiring transfusion/≥500 mL blood loss', 'uterine injury', 'cervical injury requiring repair' and 'infection reported within 1 month of abortion' were reported, they did not differ significantly between methods. Depending on measurement method, 'patient satisfaction/acceptability' was either clinically significantly higher or comparable after surgical than medical methods. The quality of this evidence was limited by low event rates and attrition bias.

CONCLUSION

Based on this evidence and consensus, women should be offered the choice of medical or surgical methods of abortion between 13+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation, unless not clinically appropriate.

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.

A comparison between labor induction with only Dilapan-S and a combination of mifepristone and Dilapan-S in nulliparous women: a prospective pilot study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to determine whether the combination of mifepristone and the osmotic dilator Dilapan-S improves the labor induction outcomes as compared to Dilapan-S alone.

METHODS

This prospective comparative study included 127 eligible women, of whom 58 underwent cervical ripening with Dilapan-S (12-h exposure, the control group) and 69 with Dilapan-S, with a concurrent pretreatment of 200 mg oral mifepristone (the study group), 8 h before Dilapan-S insertion.

RESULTS

The vaginal delivery rate in the control group and the study group was 60.3 and 76.8% (p = .045), respectively; the induction to delivery interval was 22.74 ± 3.01 h and 19,890 ± 2.42 h (p < .001), respectively; and the number of births within 24 h was 43.1 and 73.9% (p < .001), respectively. There was no difference in the rate of failed labor induction (6.9 versus 8.7%, p = .939). The Bishop's score improved significantly after the combined treatment as compared to with Dilapan alone (3.10 ± 0.58 versus 4.03 ± 1.35, p < .001). Moreover, in the study group, labor started earlier and proceeded faster with a lower additional oxytocin usage for labor induction or augmentation. There were no differences in the operative delivery rate and the perinatal outcomes. There were no adverse side effects of both mifepristone and Dilapan-S.

CONCLUSION

Our study is the first one to show that in comparison to labor induction using only osmotic dilators Dilapan-S, the combination of mifepristone and Dilapan-S is more efficient in terms of improving cervical ripening and vaginal delivery rate and reducing labor duration and frequency of oxytocin augmentation. The results revealed that this combined method is safe and has no immediate adverse effects on newborns. More studies are needed to evaluate what clinical cases are the most appropriate for the application of this combined method, considering the parity, degree of cervical ripening, and indication for labor induction.

Adjunctive Agents for Cervical Preparation in Second Trimester Surgical Abortion

Late second trimester dilation and evacuation is a challenging subset of surgical abortion. Among the reasons for this is the degree of cervical dilation required to safely extricate fetal parts. Cervical dilation is traditionally achieved by placing multiple sets of osmotic dilators over two or more days prior to the evacuation procedure; however, there is interest in shortening cervical preparation time. The use of adjuvant mifepristone and misoprostol in conjunction with osmotic dilators has been studied for this purpose, and their use demonstrates that adequate cervical dilation can be achieved in less time than with dilators alone. We present a review of the current evidence surrounding adjunctive agents for cervical preparation, and contend that for women presenting for surgical abortion care above 19 weeks gestation, the use of adjunctive mifepristone and/or misoprostol should be strongly considered along with osmotic dilator insertion when cervical preparation in less than 24 h is needed.

Current and potential methods for second trimester abortion

Medical and surgical methods can both be recommended for second trimester abortion (after 12-weeks of gestational age). Induced abortion with a mifepristone and misoprostol regimen is the preferred approach; where mifepristone is not available, misoprostol alone for medical abortion is also effective. Dilation and evacuation (D&E) is the procedure of choice for surgical abortions, and adequate cervical preparation contributes significantly to safety. Availability of drugs and instruments, ability to provide pain control, provider skill and comfort, client preference, cultural considerations, and local legislation all influence the method of abortion likely to be performed in a given setting. Both surgical and modern medical methods are safe and effective when provided by a trained, experienced provider.