Laminaria vs. vaginal misoprostol for cervical preparation before A second-trimester surgical abortion: a randomized clinical trial

被引:6
|
作者
Sagiv, Ron [1 ]
Mizrachi, Yossi
Glickman, Hagit
Kerner, Ram
Keidar, Ran
Bar, Jacob
Golan, Abraham
机构
[1] E Wolfson Med Ctr, Dept Gynecol & Obstet, IL-58100 Holon, Israel
关键词
Cervical preparation; Misoprostol; Laminaria; Surgical abortion; UTERINE PERFORATION; CURETTAGE ABORTION; ORAL MISOPROSTOL; 1ST TRIMESTER; TERMINATION; PREGNANCY; PREVENTION; EVACUATION; DILATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.contraception.2015.01.018
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of vaginal misoprostol and laminaria for cervical preparation before second-trimester surgical abortion. Study design: We performed a prospective, randomized trial comparing midnight administration of misoprostol 600 mcg vaginally to midnight placement of laminaria, before surgical abortions among women at 13-20 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was preoperative cervical dilation. Secondary outcomes were the need for further dilation, procedure duration and difficulty, immediate complications and side effects. Results: Eighty-four women were randomized, with a median gestational age of 16.5 weeks. The mean time interval between misoprostol and laminaria placement and dilatation and evacuation initiation was 11.0 +/- 2.9 and 11.2 +/- 2.0 h, respectively (p=.17). Cervical dilation was not greater in the laminaria group as compared to the misoprostol group (12.8 vs. 12.4 mm, respectively; p=.32). No difference was demonstrated regarding the need for additional dilation or the difficulty of the procedure. Procedures performed after laminaria insertion were 1 min longer (median 11 vs. 10 min, p=.04). Participants found laminaria placement more uncomfortable than vaginal misoprostol placement. Other than pain, additional side effects occurred only in the misoprostol group, primarily nausea and vomiting. One participant in the misoprostol group experienced fetal expulsion during the night before the intended procedure. Conclusion: Either vaginal misoprostol or laminaria provides adequate dilation for second-trimester surgical abortion. Laminaria causes more pain at insertion and misoprostol causes more side effects. Implications statement: We found that cervical preparation in an inpatient setting for approximately 11 h with misoprostol 600 mcg vaginally is comparable to 11 h of laminaria. However, given the potential for spontaneous expulsion and more side effects with misoprostol, laminaria is likely a better general option in such a setting. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:406 / 411
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparison of vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for second trimester abortion: randomized controlled equivalence trial
    von Hertzen, Helena
    Piaggio, Gilda
    Wojdyla, Daniel
    Huong, Nguyen Thi My
    Marions, Lena
    Okoev, Georgy
    Khomassuridze, Archil
    Kereszturi, Attila
    Mittal, Suneeta
    Nair, Rajasekharan
    Daver, Rekha
    Pretnar-Darovec, Alenka
    Dickson, Kim
    Hinh, Nguyen Duc
    Nguyen Huy Bao
    Hoang Thi Diem Tuyet
    Alexandre Peregoudov
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2009, 24 (01) : 106 - 112
  • [32] Vaginal vs. oral misoprostol for mid-trimester abortion
    Nigam, A
    Singh, VK
    Prakash, A
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGY & OBSTETRICS, 2006, 92 (03) : 270 - 271
  • [33] Vaginal misoprostol 800 μg every 12 h for second-trimester abortion
    Carbonell, JLL
    Rodríguez, J
    Delgado, E
    Sánchez, C
    Vargas, F
    Valera, L
    Marí, J
    Valero, F
    Salvador, I
    Llorente, M
    CONTRACEPTION, 2004, 70 (01) : 55 - 60
  • [34] A randomized controlled comparison of sublingual and vaginal administration of misoprostol for cervical priming before first-trimester surgical abortion
    Hamoda, H
    Ashok, PW
    Flett, GMM
    Templeton, A
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2004, 190 (01) : 55 - 59
  • [35] Second-trimester pregnancy termination with 600-μg vs. 400-μg vaginal misoprostol and systematic curettage postexpulsion:: a randomized trial
    Carbonell, Josep L.
    Torres, Miguel A.
    Reyes, Raul
    Ortega, Lourdes
    Garcia-Gallego, Francisca
    Sanchez, Carlos
    CONTRACEPTION, 2008, 77 (01) : 50 - 55
  • [36] Comparison of sequential vaginal and sublingual misoprostol after a vaginal loading dose for second-trimester abortion
    Huang, Ming-Chao
    Hsieh, Ching-Hung
    Huang, Jian-Pei
    Tsai, Hsiu-Ting
    Lee, Maw-Sheng
    TAIWANESE JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2017, 56 (03): : 312 - 314
  • [37] Oral versus vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming in first-trimester abortion:: a randomized trial
    Carbonell, JL
    Velazco, A
    Rodriguez, Y
    Tanda, R
    Sánchez, C
    Barambio, S
    Valera, L
    Chami, S
    Valero, F
    Aragón, S
    Marí, J
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CONTRACEPTION AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE, 2001, 6 (03): : 134 - 140
  • [38] Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for second trimester termination: a randomized clinical trial
    Fateme Davari Tanha
    Tahmineh Golgachi
    Nasrin Niroomand
    Mahsa Ghajarzadeh
    Reza Nasr
    Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 2013, 287 : 65 - 69
  • [39] Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for second trimester termination: a randomized clinical trial
    Tanha, Fateme Davari
    Golgachi, Tahmineh
    Niroomand, Nasrin
    Ghajarzadeh, Mahsa
    Nasr, Reza
    ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2013, 287 (01) : 65 - 69
  • [40] SECOND TRIMESTER ABORTION: MIFEPRISTONE PLUS MISOPROSTOL vs. MISOPROSTOL PLUS OXYTOCIN
    Petca, Aida
    Zvanca, Mona
    Bot, Mihaela
    Petca, Razvan-Cosmin
    Mehedintu, Claudia
    Negoita, Silvius
    Maru, Nicoleta
    FARMACIA, 2019, 67 (05) : 850 - 856