Loading…
A prospective randomized comparison of sublingual and oral misoprostol when combined with mifepristone for medical abortion at 12–20 weeks gestation
BACKGROUND: Sublingual misoprostol has been shown to be effective in medical abortion. A prospective double-blinded placebo-controlled trial was done to compare the efficacy and side-effects of sublingual to oral misoprostol when used with mifepristone for medical abortion from 12 to 20 weeks gestat...
Saved in:
Published in: | Human reproduction (Oxford) 2005-11, Vol.20 (11), p.3062-3066 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | BACKGROUND: Sublingual misoprostol has been shown to be effective in medical abortion. A prospective double-blinded placebo-controlled trial was done to compare the efficacy and side-effects of sublingual to oral misoprostol when used with mifepristone for medical abortion from 12 to 20 weeks gestation. METHODS: A total of 120 women at 12–20 weeks of gestation were randomized to receive 200 mg oral mifepristone followed by either sublingual or oral misoprostol 400 mg every 3 h for a maximum of five doses 36–48 h later. The course of misoprostol was repeated if the woman did not abort within 24 h. RESULTS: There was no significant difference (P = 0.43) in the success rate at 24 h [relative risk = 1.075; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.94–1.19]. Abortion occurred in 91.4% in the sublingual group (95% CI: 81.0–96.7%) as compared to 85.0% (95% CI: 73.7–92.1%) in the oral group. The median induction-to-abortion interval was significantly shorter (P = 0.009) in the sublingual group (5.5 h) as compared to the oral group (7.5 h). The incidence of fever was higher in the sublingual group (P < 0.0001). The incidences of other side-effects were similar. CONCLUSION: Sublingual misoprostol, when combined with mifepristone, is effective for medical abortion in the second trimester. The induction-to-abortion interval is shorter when sublingual misoprostol is used when compared to oral misoprostol. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0268-1161 1460-2350 |
DOI: | 10.1093/humrep/dei196 |