Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage

Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2013-03 (3), p.CD007223-CD007223
Hauptverfasser: Neilson, James P, Gyte, Gillian M L, Hickey, Martha, Vazquez, Juan C, Dou, Lixia
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page CD007223
container_issue 3
container_start_page CD007223
container_title Cochrane database of systematic reviews
container_volume
creator Neilson, James P
Gyte, Gillian M L
Hickey, Martha
Vazquez, Juan C
Dou, Lixia
description Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable. To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks). We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2012) and reference lists of retrieved papers. Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery or alternative methods of medical treatment. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Twenty studies (4208 women) were included. There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women, random-effects), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Twelve studies involving 2894 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (six studies used oral administration, four studies used vaginal, one study sub-lingual, one study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, 11 studies, 2493 women, random-effects) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; 11 studies, 2654 women, random-effects) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.82, 95% CI 2.93 to 11.56; nine studies, 2274 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.03; nine studies, 2179 women, random-effects).Five trials compared different routes of administration and/or doses of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being super
doi_str_mv 10.1002/14651858.CD007223.pub3
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1322728308</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1322728308</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-9f5cdc0d89b13fed80c6fe364a5c3bd253d6d185f74722c8ff4ee390416f92a73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1j01LxDAYhIMg7rr6F5YevbQmeZM2OUr9hBUvCt5KmryRSr9M0oP_3oorDMxhhuEZQvaMFoxSfs1EKZmSqqhvKa04h2JeWjgh2zXQudDwviHnMX5SCpoxdUY2HKRYpbckf0bXWdNnKaBJA44pZn4KWTfaaZh7TJgNXbQmhM584AU59aaPeHn0HXm7v3utH_PDy8NTfXPILSiecu2ldZY6pVsGHp2itvQIpTDSQuu4BFe6ldhXYsW1ynuBCJoKVnrNTQU7cvW3O4fpa8GYml8I7Hsz4rTEhgHnFVdA1VrdH6tLO6Br5tANJnw3_xfhB1QKUqo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1322728308</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Cochrane Library</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Neilson, James P ; Gyte, Gillian M L ; Hickey, Martha ; Vazquez, Juan C ; Dou, Lixia</creator><creatorcontrib>Neilson, James P ; Gyte, Gillian M L ; Hickey, Martha ; Vazquez, Juan C ; Dou, Lixia</creatorcontrib><description>Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable. To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks). We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2012) and reference lists of retrieved papers. Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery or alternative methods of medical treatment. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Twenty studies (4208 women) were included. There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women, random-effects), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Twelve studies involving 2894 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (six studies used oral administration, four studies used vaginal, one study sub-lingual, one study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, 11 studies, 2493 women, random-effects) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; 11 studies, 2654 women, random-effects) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.82, 95% CI 2.93 to 11.56; nine studies, 2274 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.03; nine studies, 2179 women, random-effects).Five trials compared different routes of administration and/or doses of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches. The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Women experiencing miscarriage at less than 13 weeks should be offered an informed choice. Future studies should include long-term follow-up.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1469-493X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007223.pub3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23543549</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><subject>Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal - administration &amp; dosage ; Abortion, Incomplete - therapy ; Extraction, Obstetrical - methods ; Female ; Humans ; Misoprostol - administration &amp; dosage ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Trimester, First ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Watchful Waiting</subject><ispartof>Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013-03 (3), p.CD007223-CD007223</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-9f5cdc0d89b13fed80c6fe364a5c3bd253d6d185f74722c8ff4ee390416f92a73</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23543549$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Neilson, James P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gyte, Gillian M L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hickey, Martha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vazquez, Juan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dou, Lixia</creatorcontrib><title>Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage</title><title>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</title><addtitle>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</addtitle><description>Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable. To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks). We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2012) and reference lists of retrieved papers. Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery or alternative methods of medical treatment. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Twenty studies (4208 women) were included. There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women, random-effects), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Twelve studies involving 2894 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (six studies used oral administration, four studies used vaginal, one study sub-lingual, one study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, 11 studies, 2493 women, random-effects) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; 11 studies, 2654 women, random-effects) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.82, 95% CI 2.93 to 11.56; nine studies, 2274 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.03; nine studies, 2179 women, random-effects).Five trials compared different routes of administration and/or doses of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches. The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Women experiencing miscarriage at less than 13 weeks should be offered an informed choice. Future studies should include long-term follow-up.</description><subject>Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Abortion, Incomplete - therapy</subject><subject>Extraction, Obstetrical - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Misoprostol - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Trimester, First</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Watchful Waiting</subject><issn>1469-493X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo1j01LxDAYhIMg7rr6F5YevbQmeZM2OUr9hBUvCt5KmryRSr9M0oP_3oorDMxhhuEZQvaMFoxSfs1EKZmSqqhvKa04h2JeWjgh2zXQudDwviHnMX5SCpoxdUY2HKRYpbckf0bXWdNnKaBJA44pZn4KWTfaaZh7TJgNXbQmhM584AU59aaPeHn0HXm7v3utH_PDy8NTfXPILSiecu2ldZY6pVsGHp2itvQIpTDSQuu4BFe6ldhXYsW1ynuBCJoKVnrNTQU7cvW3O4fpa8GYml8I7Hsz4rTEhgHnFVdA1VrdH6tLO6Br5tANJnw3_xfhB1QKUqo</recordid><startdate>20130328</startdate><enddate>20130328</enddate><creator>Neilson, James P</creator><creator>Gyte, Gillian M L</creator><creator>Hickey, Martha</creator><creator>Vazquez, Juan C</creator><creator>Dou, Lixia</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130328</creationdate><title>Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage</title><author>Neilson, James P ; Gyte, Gillian M L ; Hickey, Martha ; Vazquez, Juan C ; Dou, Lixia</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c382t-9f5cdc0d89b13fed80c6fe364a5c3bd253d6d185f74722c8ff4ee390416f92a73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Abortion, Incomplete - therapy</topic><topic>Extraction, Obstetrical - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Misoprostol - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Trimester, First</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Watchful Waiting</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Neilson, James P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gyte, Gillian M L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hickey, Martha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vazquez, Juan C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dou, Lixia</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Neilson, James P</au><au>Gyte, Gillian M L</au><au>Hickey, Martha</au><au>Vazquez, Juan C</au><au>Dou, Lixia</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage</atitle><jtitle>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</jtitle><addtitle>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</addtitle><date>2013-03-28</date><risdate>2013</risdate><issue>3</issue><spage>CD007223</spage><epage>CD007223</epage><pages>CD007223-CD007223</pages><eissn>1469-493X</eissn><abstract>Miscarriage occurs in 10% to 15% of pregnancies. The traditional treatment, after miscarriage, has been to perform surgery to remove any remaining placental tissues in the uterus ('evacuation of uterus'). However, medical treatments, or expectant care (no treatment), may also be effective, safe and acceptable. To assess the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of any medical treatment for incomplete miscarriage (before 24 weeks). We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 November 2012) and reference lists of retrieved papers. Randomised controlled trials comparing medical treatment with expectant care or surgery or alternative methods of medical treatment. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Twenty studies (4208 women) were included. There were no trials specifically of miscarriage treatment after 13 weeks' gestation.Three trials involving 335 women compared misoprostol treatment (all vaginally administered) with expectant care. There was no statistically significant difference in complete miscarriage (average risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 2.10; two studies, 150 women, random-effects), or in the need for surgical evacuation (average RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.26; two studies, 308 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'.Twelve studies involving 2894 women addressed the comparison of misoprostol (six studies used oral administration, four studies used vaginal, one study sub-lingual, one study combined vaginal + oral) with surgical evacuation. There was a slightly lower incidence of complete miscarriage with misoprostol (average RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99, 11 studies, 2493 women, random-effects) but with success rate high for both methods. Overall, there were fewer surgical evacuations with misoprostol (average RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; 11 studies, 2654 women, random-effects) but more unplanned procedures (average RR 5.82, 95% CI 2.93 to 11.56; nine studies, 2274 women, random-effects). There were few data on 'deaths or serious complications'. Nausea was more common with misoprostol (average RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.03; nine studies, 2179 women, random-effects).Five trials compared different routes of administration and/or doses of misoprostol. There was no clear evidence of one regimen being superior to another. Limited evidence suggests that women generally seem satisfied with their care. Long-term follow-up from one included study identified no difference in subsequent fertility between the three approaches. The available evidence suggests that medical treatment, with misoprostol, and expectant care are both acceptable alternatives to routine surgical evacuation given the availability of health service resources to support all three approaches. Women experiencing miscarriage at less than 13 weeks should be offered an informed choice. Future studies should include long-term follow-up.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>23543549</pmid><doi>10.1002/14651858.CD007223.pub3</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1469-493X
ispartof Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013-03 (3), p.CD007223-CD007223
issn 1469-493X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1322728308
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Cochrane Library; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Abortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal - administration & dosage
Abortion, Incomplete - therapy
Extraction, Obstetrical - methods
Female
Humans
Misoprostol - administration & dosage
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Trimester, First
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Watchful Waiting
title Medical treatments for incomplete miscarriage
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T15%3A39%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Medical%20treatments%20for%20incomplete%20miscarriage&rft.jtitle=Cochrane%20database%20of%20systematic%20reviews&rft.au=Neilson,%20James%20P&rft.date=2013-03-28&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=CD007223&rft.epage=CD007223&rft.pages=CD007223-CD007223&rft.eissn=1469-493X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/14651858.CD007223.pub3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1322728308%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1322728308&rft_id=info:pmid/23543549&rfr_iscdi=true