Midtrimester dilation and evacuation versus prostaglandin induction: a comparison of composite outcomes.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;
205:386.e1-7. [PMID:
22083061 DOI:
10.1016/j.ajog.2011.07.028]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2011] [Revised: 06/15/2011] [Accepted: 07/15/2011] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the study was to determine the optimal procedure for midtrimester uterine evacuation.
STUDY DESIGN
This was a retrospective cohort study of women undergoing midtrimester uterine evacuation by prostaglandin induction or dilation and evacuation (D&E). Primary outcome was composite complication, defined as any of the following: infection, need for additional surgery, unexpected admission or readmission, serious maternal morbidity, and/or maternal death.
RESULTS
Two hundred twenty patients met inclusion criteria: 94 D&E and 126 induction. D&E was associated with less composite complications (15% vs 28%, P = .02), which persisted in adjusted analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.99; P = .05). Women in the induction group had higher rates of retained placenta requiring curettage (22% vs 2%, P = .01), whereas cervical injury was more common in the D&E group (5% vs 0%, P = .01). Median length of stay was significantly shorter in the D&E group (5.7 hours vs 28.4 hours, P < .001).
CONCLUSION
Midtrimester D&E is associated with fewer complications than prostaglandin induction.
Collapse