...
首页> 外文期刊>Obstetrics and Gynecology: Journal of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists >Cervical Preparation Before Dilation and Evacuation Using Adjunctive Misoprostol or Mifepristone Compared With Overnight Osmotic Dilators Alone A Randomized Controlled Trial
【24h】

Cervical Preparation Before Dilation and Evacuation Using Adjunctive Misoprostol or Mifepristone Compared With Overnight Osmotic Dilators Alone A Randomized Controlled Trial

机译:米索前列醇或米非司酮与单独的隔夜渗透性扩张剂相比较,在进行扩张和撤离前进行宫颈准备与一项随机对照试验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate operative time after adjunctive misoprostol or mifepristone compared with overnight osmotic dilators alone for cervical preparation before dilation and evacuation at 16-23 6/7 weeks of gestation.METHODS:This double-blind, three-arm, multicenter, randomized trial compared overnight osmotic dilators alone, dilators plus 400 micrograms buccal misoprostol 3 hours preoperatively, and dilators plus 200 mg oral mifepristone during dilator placement for dilation and evacuation. Our primary outcome was dilation and evacuation operative time within two cohorts: 16-18 6/7 weeks of gestation (N=150) and 19-23 6/7 weeks of gestation (N=150). Three hundred women were required for 80% power to detect a 2-minute difference in operative time. Secondary outcomes included initial cervical dilation, side effects, physician satisfaction by Likert scale, and complications.RESULTS:Between February 2013 and February 2014 we randomized 300 women evenly across treatment arms. Group demographics were similar. We found no difference in operative time in either gestational cohort (early cohort [minutes]: 5.113.0 dilators alone, 4.993.3 misoprostol, 4.332.0 mifepristone, P=.34; late cohort [minutes]: 7.50 +/- 3.7 dilators alone, 7.62 +/- 5.4 misoprostol, 6.74 +/- 3.2 mifepristone, P=.53). In the early cohort, initial dilation was greater with misoprostol than dilators alone (2.4 compared with 2.0 cm, P=.007). Patients given misoprostol had significantly more pain, fever, and chills. In the late cohort, dilation and evacuation procedures were less difficult after mifepristone (4.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0-9.6) than misoprostol (18.8%, 95% CI 7.7-29.8) or dilators alone (18.8%, 95% CI 7.7-29.8; P=.04). We had inadequate power to infer differences in complications: dilators alone (10%, 95% CI 4.2-16.0) compared with misoprostol (2%, 95% CI 0-4.7) compared with mifepristone (2%, 95% CI 0-4.8).CONCLUSION:Despite no difference in operative time, adjunctive mifepristone facilitates later dilation and evacuation compared with osmotic dilators alone and is better tolerated than misoprostol.CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01751087.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:I
机译:目的:评估在米氏前列腺素或米非司酮辅助治疗后的手术时间,与仅隔夜渗透性扩张剂进行宫颈准备,然后在妊娠16-23 6/7周进行扩张和抽空之前的方法。方法:这项双盲,三臂,多中心,随机试验比较了单独的通宵渗透扩张剂,术前3小时扩张剂加400微克颊米索前列醇以及扩张器放置期间用于扩张和撤离的扩张剂加200 mg口服米非司酮。我们的主要结果是在两个队列中进行扩张和疏散手术时间:妊娠16-18 6/7周(N = 150)和妊娠19-23 6/7周(N = 150)。需要300名女性获得80%的力量才能检测出手术时间的2分钟差异。次要结果包括初始宫颈扩张,副作用,李克特量表对医生的满意程度和并发症。结果:2013年2月至2014年2月,我们将300例妇女平均分配到各治疗组。群体人口统计数据相似。我们在两个妊​​娠队列中均未发现手术时间的差异(早期队列[分钟]:仅5.113.0扩张剂,4.993.3米索前列醇,4.332.0米非司酮,P = .34;晚期队列[分钟]:7.50 +/- 3.7单独使用扩张剂,米索前列醇7.62 +/- 5.4,米非司酮6.74 +/- 3.2,P = .53)。在早期队列中,米索前列醇的初始扩张大于单独的扩张器(2.4比2.0 cm,P = .007)。服用米索前列醇的患者疼痛,发烧和发冷明显多。在晚期队列中,米非司酮(4.1%,95%置信区间[CI] 0.0-9.6)较米索前列醇(18.8%,95%CI 7.7-29.8)或仅使用扩张剂(18.8%,95)进行扩张和撤离程序的难度要小。 %CI 7.7-29.8; P = .04)。我们没有足够的能力来推断并发症的差异:单独使用扩张剂(10%,95%CI 4.2-16.0)与米索前列醇(2%,95%CI 0-4.7)相比,与米非司酮(2%,95%CI 0-4.8)相比结论:尽管手术时间无差异,但与单独的渗透性扩张药相比,米非司酮辅助的米非司酮可促进以后的扩张和撤离,并且比米索前列醇耐受性更好。一世

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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