...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health. >Mifepristone and misoprostol compared to osmotic dilators for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 15-18 weeks' gestation: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial
【24h】

Mifepristone and misoprostol compared to osmotic dilators for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 15-18 weeks' gestation: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

机译:在15-18周的手术流产之前,米非生素和米索前列醇与宫颈渗透剂的渗透扩张剂相比:妊娠:一项随机对照非劣效性试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Objective Cervical preparation is recommended prior to second-trimester surgical abortion. Osmotic dilators are an effective means to prepare the cervix, but require an additional procedure and may cause discomfort. We compared cervical preparation with mifepristone and misoprostol to preparation with osmotic dilators. Study design A randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial was performed to compare cervical preparation with mifepristone and misoprostol to preparation with osmotic dilators in women undergoing surgical abortion between 15 and 18 weeks gestation. The medication group (n=29) received mifepristone 200 mg orally 24 hours prior to uterine evacuation and misoprostol 400 mu g buccally 2 hours before the procedure. The dilator group (n=20) underwent osmotic dilator insertion 24 hours prior to the procedure. The primary outcome was total procedure time, from insertion to removal of the speculum. Secondary outcomes included operative time (from intrauterine instrumentation to speculum removal), initial cervical dilation, nausea, pain, ease of procedure, and whether participants would choose the same modality in the future. Results For mean total procedure time, medication preparation (14.0 min, 95% CI 12.0-16.1) was not inferior to dilators (14.3 min, 95% CI 11.7 to 16.8, p<0.001). Mean operative time and ease of procedure were also similar between groups. More women in the medication group than the dilator group would prefer to use the same method in the future (86% vs 30%, p=0.003). Conclusion Prior to surgical abortion at 15-18 weeks, use of mifepristone and misoprostol did not result in longer procedure times than overnight osmotic dilators.
机译:建议在第二孕期手术堕胎之前进行客观的宫颈制剂。渗透扩张器是准备子宫颈的有效手段,但需要额外的程序并可能引起不适。我们将宫颈制剂与米沙酮和米索前列醇与渗透扩张剂进行了比较。研究设计进行了一项随机,受控的,非效率的试验,以将宫颈制剂与米非司酮和米索前列醇进行比较,以便在15至18周妊娠之间进行手术流产的妇女中的渗透扩张剂制备。药物组(n = 29)在子宫疏散前24小时口服米非司酮200 mg,并且在手术前2小时2小时,米索前列醇400 mu g。在手术前24小时,扩张器组(n = 20)进行了渗透扩张器插入。主要结果是总过程时间,从插入到去除窥镜。次要结果包括手术时间(从宫内仪器到去除镜),初始宫颈扩张,恶心,疼痛,易于手术,以及参与者将来是否会选择相同的方式。平均总过程时间的结果,药物制剂(14.0分钟,95%CI 12.0-16.1)不优于扩张器(14.3分钟,95%CI 11.7至16.8,p <0.001)。两组之间的平均手术时间和易于操作也相似。药物组中的女性多于扩张器组,将来希望使用相同的方法(86%vs 30%,p = 0.003)。结论在15-18周的手术流产之前,使用米非司酮和米索前列醇的使用时间不如过夜渗透扩张剂更长。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号