Mifepristone vs. osmotic dilator insertion for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 14-16 weeks

A randomized trial

Lynn Borgatta, Danielle Roncari, Sarita Sonalkar, Alice Mark, Melody Hou, Molly Finneseth, Olivera Vragovic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Cervical preparation is recommended before second-trimester abortion. We investigated the use of a pharmacologic method of preparation, mifepristone, as compared to osmotic dilators for surgical abortions at 14-16 weeks. Study Design: This was a randomized, parallel-group study with concealed allocation. Women were allocated to receive osmotic dilators or mifepristone 200 mg orally 24 h prior to abortion. The study population was 50 women seeking surgical abortion at 14-16 menstrual weeks in a hospital-based abortion service. The primary outcome was the length of time to perform the procedure; the study had 80% power to detect a difference of more than 3 min in procedure time. Secondary outcomes included cervical dilation, side effects and acceptability. Results: The mean abortion time for the osmotic dilator group was 8.00 min [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.75-11.47], and that for the mifepristone group was 9.87 min (95% CI 8.93-11.36). Side effects of pain were more common in the osmotic dilator group. Conclusion: Mifepristone did not increase the time for abortion by more than the prespecified margin (3 min). Women preferred mifepristone to osmotic dilators.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)567-571
Number of pages5
JournalContraception
Volume86
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mifepristone
Confidence Intervals
Second Pregnancy Trimester
Dilatation
Pain
Population

Keywords

  • Abortion
  • Cervical priming
  • Laminaria
  • Mifepristone
  • Osmotic dilators
  • Second trimester

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Reproductive Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Mifepristone vs. osmotic dilator insertion for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 14-16 weeks : A randomized trial. / Borgatta, Lynn; Roncari, Danielle; Sonalkar, Sarita; Mark, Alice; Hou, Melody; Finneseth, Molly; Vragovic, Olivera.

In: Contraception, Vol. 86, No. 5, 11.2012, p. 567-571.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Borgatta, Lynn ; Roncari, Danielle ; Sonalkar, Sarita ; Mark, Alice ; Hou, Melody ; Finneseth, Molly ; Vragovic, Olivera. / Mifepristone vs. osmotic dilator insertion for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 14-16 weeks : A randomized trial. In: Contraception. 2012 ; Vol. 86, No. 5. pp. 567-571.
@article{c77aa97877ff4eda9e9333584ebc6de3,
title = "Mifepristone vs. osmotic dilator insertion for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 14-16 weeks: A randomized trial",
abstract = "Background: Cervical preparation is recommended before second-trimester abortion. We investigated the use of a pharmacologic method of preparation, mifepristone, as compared to osmotic dilators for surgical abortions at 14-16 weeks. Study Design: This was a randomized, parallel-group study with concealed allocation. Women were allocated to receive osmotic dilators or mifepristone 200 mg orally 24 h prior to abortion. The study population was 50 women seeking surgical abortion at 14-16 menstrual weeks in a hospital-based abortion service. The primary outcome was the length of time to perform the procedure; the study had 80{\%} power to detect a difference of more than 3 min in procedure time. Secondary outcomes included cervical dilation, side effects and acceptability. Results: The mean abortion time for the osmotic dilator group was 8.00 min [95{\%} confidence interval (CI) 6.75-11.47], and that for the mifepristone group was 9.87 min (95{\%} CI 8.93-11.36). Side effects of pain were more common in the osmotic dilator group. Conclusion: Mifepristone did not increase the time for abortion by more than the prespecified margin (3 min). Women preferred mifepristone to osmotic dilators.",
keywords = "Abortion, Cervical priming, Laminaria, Mifepristone, Osmotic dilators, Second trimester",
author = "Lynn Borgatta and Danielle Roncari and Sarita Sonalkar and Alice Mark and Melody Hou and Molly Finneseth and Olivera Vragovic",
year = "2012",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.contraception.2012.05.002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "86",
pages = "567--571",
journal = "Contraception",
issn = "0010-7824",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mifepristone vs. osmotic dilator insertion for cervical preparation prior to surgical abortion at 14-16 weeks

T2 - A randomized trial

AU - Borgatta, Lynn

AU - Roncari, Danielle

AU - Sonalkar, Sarita

AU - Mark, Alice

AU - Hou, Melody

AU - Finneseth, Molly

AU - Vragovic, Olivera

PY - 2012/11

Y1 - 2012/11

N2 - Background: Cervical preparation is recommended before second-trimester abortion. We investigated the use of a pharmacologic method of preparation, mifepristone, as compared to osmotic dilators for surgical abortions at 14-16 weeks. Study Design: This was a randomized, parallel-group study with concealed allocation. Women were allocated to receive osmotic dilators or mifepristone 200 mg orally 24 h prior to abortion. The study population was 50 women seeking surgical abortion at 14-16 menstrual weeks in a hospital-based abortion service. The primary outcome was the length of time to perform the procedure; the study had 80% power to detect a difference of more than 3 min in procedure time. Secondary outcomes included cervical dilation, side effects and acceptability. Results: The mean abortion time for the osmotic dilator group was 8.00 min [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.75-11.47], and that for the mifepristone group was 9.87 min (95% CI 8.93-11.36). Side effects of pain were more common in the osmotic dilator group. Conclusion: Mifepristone did not increase the time for abortion by more than the prespecified margin (3 min). Women preferred mifepristone to osmotic dilators.

AB - Background: Cervical preparation is recommended before second-trimester abortion. We investigated the use of a pharmacologic method of preparation, mifepristone, as compared to osmotic dilators for surgical abortions at 14-16 weeks. Study Design: This was a randomized, parallel-group study with concealed allocation. Women were allocated to receive osmotic dilators or mifepristone 200 mg orally 24 h prior to abortion. The study population was 50 women seeking surgical abortion at 14-16 menstrual weeks in a hospital-based abortion service. The primary outcome was the length of time to perform the procedure; the study had 80% power to detect a difference of more than 3 min in procedure time. Secondary outcomes included cervical dilation, side effects and acceptability. Results: The mean abortion time for the osmotic dilator group was 8.00 min [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.75-11.47], and that for the mifepristone group was 9.87 min (95% CI 8.93-11.36). Side effects of pain were more common in the osmotic dilator group. Conclusion: Mifepristone did not increase the time for abortion by more than the prespecified margin (3 min). Women preferred mifepristone to osmotic dilators.

KW - Abortion

KW - Cervical priming

KW - Laminaria

KW - Mifepristone

KW - Osmotic dilators

KW - Second trimester

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84867092189&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84867092189&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.05.002

DO - 10.1016/j.contraception.2012.05.002

M3 - Article

VL - 86

SP - 567

EP - 571

JO - Contraception

JF - Contraception

SN - 0010-7824

IS - 5

ER -