Home Articles & Issues Published Ahead-of-Print CME Collections ABOG MOC II Podcasts Videos Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > July 2013 - Volume 122 - Issue 1 > Buccal Misoprostol Compared With Synthetic Osmotic Cervical...
Obstetrics & Gynecology:
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182983889
Original Research

Buccal Misoprostol Compared With Synthetic Osmotic Cervical Dilator Before Surgical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Bartz, Deborah MD, MPH; Maurer, Rie MA; Allen, Rebecca H. MD, MPH; Fortin, Jennifer MPH; Kuang, Bernice BA; Goldberg, Alisa B. MD, MPH

Collapse Box

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and acceptability of buccal misoprostol or a synthetic osmotic cervical dilator for cervical preparation before same-day late first-trimester and early second-trimester surgical abortion.

METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we compared 400 micrograms of buccal misoprostol with one synthetic osmotic cervical dilator administered 3–4 hours before surgical abortion among women at 12–15 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was mean cervical circumferential dilation at the time of surgery. Randomization was stratified by parity and sample size calculated to detect a 3-French difference between groups with 90% power with a two-sided α of .05. Secondary outcomes included ease of further mechanical dilation, procedure time, complications, ripening and procedural pain, and participants' satisfaction.

RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five women were randomized with a mean gestational age of 13 3/7 weeks. Treatment with the synthetic osmotic dilator and buccal misoprostol resulted in similar preoperative dilation (mean French 33.9 compared with 32.1, P=.065). Procedure time, procedural pain, number of complications, and participants' satisfaction and preferences did not differ between treatment groups. Misoprostol participants experienced more pain during ripening (P=.008). All but six participants, three in each arm, required mechanical dilation at the time of the procedure. This manual dilation was subjectively easier in participants who received the synthetic osmotic cervical dilator (P=.015). All participants were able to have their procedure in 1 day without further cervical preparation.

CONCLUSION: Either buccal misoprostol or a synthetic osmotic cervical dilator provides adequate dilation for same-day late first-trimester and early second-trimester abortion. Despite more pain with misoprostol, patient satisfaction with misoprostol and the synthetic dilator is similar.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00835731.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I

© 2013 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Login

Article Tools

Share