Response to Letter to the Editor

摘要

We thank Ngo and Park for their comments to our paper, "Comparing two early medical abortion regimens: mifepristone+misoprostol vs. misoprostol alone" [1]. We agree in principle that misoprostol is the only available medical abortifacient for many women in countries with restrictive access to abortion and no access to mifepristone. Yet, we caution about misinterpretation of our results as not being representative of potential outcomes with misoprostol-only regimens in a range of settings. Indeed, although Ngo and Park cite a paper in 2003 reporting a 90% efficacy rate [2], as they note in their letter, the largest study of 2066 women completed in 2007 reports efficacy rates in the high 70% and low 80% [3], which are consistent with our results (showing 76.2% efficacy with misoprostol-only) [3].