4.3 Article

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

期刊

CONTRACEPTION
卷 92, 期 3, 页码 234-240

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2015.04.005

关键词

Surgical abortion; Cervical preparation; Misoprostol; Osmotic dilators

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据