Cervical preparation for first trimester surgical abortion
- PMID:20166091
- DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007207.pub2
Cervical preparation for first trimester surgical abortion
Abstract
Background: Preparing the cervix prior to surgical abortion is intended to make the procedure both easier and safer. Options for cervical preparation include osmotic dilators and pharmacologic agents. Many formulations and regimens are available, and recommendations from professional organizations vary for the use of preparatory techniques in women of different ages, parity or gestational age of the pregnancy.
Objectives: To determine whether cervical preparation is necessary in the first trimester, and if so, which preparatory agent is preferred.
Search strategy: We searched Cochrane, Popline, Embase, Medline and Lilacs databases for randomised controlled trials investigating the use of cervical preparatory techniques prior to first trimester surgical abortion. In addition, we hand-searched key references and contacted authors to locate unpublished studies or studies not identified in the database searches.
Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials investigating any pharmacologic or mechanical method of cervical preparation, with the exception of nitric oxide donors (the subject of another Cochrane review), administered prior to first trimester surgical abortion were included. Outcome measures must have included the amount of cervical dilation achieved, the procedure duration or difficulty, side-effects, patient satisfaction or adverse events to be included in this review.
Data collection and analysis: Trials under consideration were evaluated by considering whether inclusion criteria were met as well as methodologic quality. Fifty-one studies were included, resulting in 24 different cervical preparation comparisons. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous data.
Main results: When compared to placebo, misoprostol (400-600 microg given vaginally or sublingually), gemeprost, mifepristone (200 or 600 mg), prostaglandin E and F(2alpha) (2.5 mg administered intracervically) demonstrated larger cervical preparation effects. When misoprostol was compared to gemeprost, misoprostol was more effective in preparing the cervix and was associated with fewer gastrointestinal side-effects. For vaginal administration, administration 2 hours prior was less effective than administration 3 hours prior to the abortion. Compared to oral misoprostol administration, the vaginal route was associated with significantly greater initial cervical dilation and lower rates of side-effects; however, sublingual administration 2-3 hours prior to the procedure demonstrated cervical effects superior to vaginal administration.When misoprostol (600 microg oral or 800 microg vaginal) was compared to mifepristone (200 mg administered 24 hours prior to procedure), misoprostol had inferior cervical preparatory effects. Compared to day-prior laminaria tents, 200 or 400 microg vaginal misoprostol showed no differences in the need for further mechanical dilation or length of the procedure; similarly, the osmotic dilators Lamicel and Dilapan showed no differences in cervical ripening when compared to gemeprost, although gemeprost had cervical effects which were superior to laminaria tents. Older prostaglandin regimens (sulprostone, prostaglandin E(2) andF(2alpha)) were associated with high rates of gastrointestinal side-effects and unplanned pregnancy expulsions. Few studies reported women's satisfaction with cervical preparatory techniques.
Authors' conclusions: Modern methods of cervical ripening are generally safe, although efficacy and side-effects between methods vary. Reports of adverse events such as cervical laceration or uterine perforation are uncommon overall in this body of evidence and no published study has investigated whether cervical preparation impacts these rare outcomes. Cervical preparation decreases the length of the abortion procedure; this may become increasingly important with increasing gestational age, as mechanical dilation at later gestational ages takes longer and becomes more difficult. These data do not suggest a gestational age where the benefits of cervical dilation outweigh the side-effects, including pain, that women experience with cervical ripening procedures or the prolongation of the time interval before procedure completion. Mifepristone 200 mg, osmotic dilators and misoprostol, 400microg administered either vaginally or sublingually, are the most effective methods of cervical preparation.
Comment in
- Cervical preparation for first trimester surgical abortion.[No authors listed][No authors listed]Obstet Gynecol. 2010 May;115(5):1075-1076. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181dc216b.Obstet Gynecol. 2010.PMID:20410785No abstract available.
Similar articles
- Cervical ripening before first trimester surgical evacuation for non-viable pregnancy.Webber K, Grivell RM.Webber K, et al.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 10;2015(11):CD009954. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009954.pub2.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015.PMID:26559875Free PMC article.Review.
- Cervical dilation before first-trimester surgical abortion (<14 weeks' gestation). SFP Guideline 20071.Allen RH, Goldberg AB; Board of Society of Family Planning.Allen RH, et al.Contraception. 2007 Aug;76(2):139-56. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2007.05.001. Epub 2007 Jul 10.Contraception. 2007.PMID:17656184
- Medical methods for first trimester abortion.Kulier R, Gülmezoglu AM, Hofmeyr GJ, Cheng LN, Campana A.Kulier R, et al.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(1):CD002855. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002855.pub2.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004.Update in:Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(2):CD002855. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002855.pub3.PMID:14973995Updated.Review.
- Cervical preparation for second-trimester surgical abortion prior to 20 weeks' gestation: SFP Guideline #2013-4.Fox MC, Krajewski CM.Fox MC, et al.Contraception. 2014 Feb;89(2):75-84. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2013.11.001. Epub 2013 Nov 11.Contraception. 2014.PMID:24331860
- Cervical preparation for second trimester dilation and evacuation.Newmann SJ, Dalve-Endres A, Diedrich JT, Steinauer JE, Meckstroth K, Drey EA.Newmann SJ, et al.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Aug 4;(8):CD007310. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007310.pub2.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010.PMID:20687085Review.
Cited by
- Cervical priming and scar rupture.Padmaja M, Gupta JK, Sharjil S.Padmaja M, et al.J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2012 Dec;62(Suppl 1):99-100. doi: 10.1007/s13224-013-0376-4. Epub 2013 Feb 5.J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2012.PMID:24293894Free PMC article.No abstract available.
- Management of first trimester pregnancy loss can be safely moved into the office.Allison JL, Sherwood RS, Schust DJ.Allison JL, et al.Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2011;4(1):5-14.Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2011.PMID:21629493Free PMC article.
- Implementation of misoprostol for postabortion care in Kenya and Uganda: a qualitative evaluation.Osur J, Baird TL, Levandowski BA, Jackson E, Murokora D.Osur J, et al.Glob Health Action. 2013 Apr 24;6:1-11. doi: 10.3402/gha.v6i0.19649.Glob Health Action. 2013.PMID:23618341Free PMC article.
- First-trimester surgical abortion practice in Canada in 2012.Renner RM, Hu V, Guilbert ÉR, Albert AYK, White KO, Jones HE, Guan X, Norman WV.Renner RM, et al.Can Fam Physician. 2023 Jan;69(1):36-44. doi: 10.46747/cfp.690136.Can Fam Physician. 2023.PMID:36693753Free PMC article.
- To compare the methods of pregnancy termination for fetal abnormality in the first and second trimesters.Wong HS.Wong HS.ISRN Obstet Gynecol. 2012;2012:843245. doi: 10.5402/2012/843245. Epub 2012 May 6.ISRN Obstet Gynecol. 2012.PMID:22619729Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Related information
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous