Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for second trimester termination: a randomized clinical trial

Archives of gynecology - Tập 287 - Trang 65-69 - 2012
Fateme Davari Tanha1,2, Tahmineh Golgachi3, Nasrin Niroomand1, Mahsa Ghajarzadeh4, Reza Nasr5
1Women’s Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2OBS and Gyn, Valiasr Reproductive Health Center, Mirza Kochak Khan Hospital, Tehran, Iran
3Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
4Brain and Spinal Injury Repair Research Center (BASIR), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
5Consultant in Obstructions and Gyn Barnet Hospital, Barnet, UK

Tóm tắt

To evaluate the efficacy of two routes of administration of misoprostol (sublingual and vaginal) for medical termination of second trimester pregnancies. One hundred and thirty-four women referred for second trimester termination were enrolled in this randomized clinical trial. They were divided to receive 400 μg every 6 h misoprostol either sublingually or vaginally. They were followed for 48 h, at which point they underwent D&C if the termination was not complete. Efficacy was defined as successful termination without the need for interventions. There were no differences between the vaginal and sublingual groups in terms of tablets mean dose of misoprostol applied (1360 ± 2.4 vs. 1320 ± 2.3) or endometrial thickness after termination of pregnancy (13.02 ± 5.2 vs. 13.3 ± 6.6 mm). The success rate was 61.2 % (n = 41) in the vaginal group versus 70.1 % (n = 47) in the sublingual group (p = 0.3). Twenty-six patients (38.8 %) in the vaginal group underwent D&C due to retained tissue, compared with 20 patients (29.8 %) in the sublingual group. In primigravids, the success rate was significantly higher in the sublingual group than vaginal group. There was no significant difference with regards to complications between the two groups. The sublingual route of misoprostol administration has the same efficacy as the vaginal route and can be applied for second trimester pregnancy termination in primigravid women in outpatient settings due to its simple administrations.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Kunwar S, Saha PK, Goel P, Huria A, Tandon R, Sehgal A (2010) Second trimester pregnancy termination with 400 μg vaginal misoprostol: efficacy and safety. BioScience Trends 4:351–354 Boza AV, de León RG, Castillo LS, Mariño DR, Mitchell EM (2008) Misoprostol preferable to ethacridine lactate for abortions at 13–20 weeks of pregnancy: Cuban experience. Reprod Health Matters 16(Suppl 31):189–195 Goldberg AB, Greenberg MB, Darney PD (2001) Misoprostol and pregnancy. N Engl J Med 344:38–47 Dickinson JE, Godfrey M, Evans SF (1998) Efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol in second-trimester pregnancy termination: a randomized controlled trial. J Matern Fetal Med 7:115–119 Lalitkumar S, Bygdeman M, Gemzell-Danielsson K (2007) Midtrimester induced abortion: a review. Hum Reprod Update 13:37–52 Khan RU, El-Refaey H, Sharma S, Sooranna D, Stafford M (2004) Oral, rectal and vaginal pharmacokinetics of misoprosol. Obstet Gynecol 103:866–870 Honkanen H, Piaggio G, Hertzen H et al (2004) WHO multinational study of three misoprostol regimens after mifepristone for early medical abortion. BJOG 111(7):715–725 Jain JK, Mishell DR Jr (1996) A comparison of misoprostol with and without laminaria tents for induction of second-trimester abortion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:173–177 Jain JK, Kuo J, Mishell DR Jr (1999) A comparison of two dosing regimens of intravaginal misoprostol for second-trimester pregnancy termination. Obstet Gynecol 93:571–575 Nuutila M, Toivonen J, Ylikorkala O, Halmesmaki E (1997) A comparison between two doses of intravaginal misoprostol and gemeprost for induction of second-trimester abortion. Obstet Gynecol 90:896–900 Herabutya Y, O-Prasertsawat P (1998) Second trimester abortion using intravaginal misoprostol. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 60:161–165 Bugalho A, Bique C, Almeida L, Faundes A (1993) The effectiveness of intravaginal misoprostol (Cytotec) in inducing abortion after eleven weeks of pregnancy. Stud Fam Plann 24:319–323 von Hertzen H, Piaggio G, Wojdyla D, Huong NTM, Marions L, Okoev G et al (2009) Comparison of vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for second trimester abortion: randomized controlled equivalence trial. Hum Reprod 24:106–112 Tang OS, Lau WNT, Chan CCW, Ho PC (2004) A prospective randomised comparison of sublingual and vaginal misoprostol in second trimester termination of pregnancy. BJOG 111:1001–1005 Aronsson A, Bygdeman M, Gemzell-Danielsson K (2004) Effects of misoprostol on uterine contractility following different routes of administration. Hum Reprod 19:81–84 Krzymowski T, Stefan′czyk-Krzymowska S, Koziorowski M (1989) Counter current transfer of PGF2 alpha in the mesometrial vessels as a mechanism for prevention of luteal regression in early pregnancy. Acta Physiol Pol 40:23–34 Tanha FD, Feizi M, Shariat M (2010) Sublingual versus vaginal misoprostol for the management of missed abortion. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 36:525–532 Caliskan E, Dilbaz S, Doger E, Ozeren S, Dilbaz B (2005) Randomized comparison of 3 misoprostol protocols for abortion induction at 13–20 weeks of gestation. J Reprod Med 50:173–180 Saxena P, Salhan S, Sarda N (2004) Comparison between the sublingual and oral route of misoprostol for pre-abortion cervical priming in first trimester abortions. Hum Reprod 19:1–4 Tang OS, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Ho PC (2007) Misoprostol: pharmacokinetic profiles, effects on the uterus and side-effects. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 99(Suppl 2):S160–S167 Nanda K, Peloggia A, Grimes D, Lopez L, Nanda G (2006) Expectant care versus surgical treatment for miscarriage. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 19:CD003518