von Hertzen Helena, Piaggio Gilda, Huong Nguyen Thi My, Arustamyan Karine, Cabezas Evelio, Gomez Manuel, Khomassuridze Archil, Shah Rashmi, Mittal Suneeta, Nair Rajasekharan, Erdenetungalag Radnaabazar, Huong To Minh, Vy Nguyen Duc, Phuong Nguyen Thi Ngoc, Tuyet Hoang Thi Diem, Peregoudov Alexandre
UNDP/UNFPA/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction, Department of Reproductive Health and Research, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Lancet. 2007 Jun 9;369(9577):1938-46. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60914-3.
The most effective route and best interval between several doses of misoprostol to induce abortion have not been defined. Our aim was to assess the effects of the interval between multiple doses of misoprostol and the route of administration to terminate pregnancy.
2066 healthy pregnant women requesting medical abortion with 63 days or less of gestation were randomly assigned within 11 gynaecological centres in six countries to the four treatment groups (three doses of 0.8 mg misoprostol given sublingually at 3-h intervals, vaginally 3 h, sublingually 12 h, and vaginally 12 h), stratifying by gestational age. This was an equivalence trial with a 5% margin of equivalence. The primary endpoints were efficacy of treatment to achieve complete abortion and to terminate pregnancy. The main efficacy analysis excluded women lost to follow-up. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN10531821.
Efficacy outcomes were analysed for 2046 women (99%), excluding 20 lost to follow-up. Complete abortion rates at 2-week follow-up were recorded for 431 (84%) in the sublingual and for 434 (85%) women in the vaginal group when misoprostol was given at 3-h intervals (difference 0.4%, 95% CI -4.0 to 4.9, p=0.85 equivalence shown), and for 399 (78%) in the sublingual and for 425 (83%) in the vaginal 12-h groups (4.6%, -0.2 to 9.5, p=0.06, equivalence not shown). In the 3-h groups, pregnancy continued in 29 (6%) women after sublingual and in 20 (4%) women after vaginal administration (difference 1.8%, 95% CI -0.8 to 4.4, p=0.19, equivalence shown); in the 12-h groups it continued in 47 (9%) after sublingual and in 25 (5%) after vaginal administration (4.4%, 1.2-7.5, p=0.01, vaginal better than sublingual). Differences for complete abortion between intervals for sublingual and vaginal routes were 6% (95% CI 1.0-10.6, p=0.02, 3 h better than 12 h) and 2% (-2.9 to 6.1, p=0.49, equivalence not shown), respectively; for continuing pregnancies they were 4% (0.4-6.8, p=0.03, 3 h better than 12 h) and 1% (-1.5 to 3.5, p=0.44, equivalence shown), respectively.
Administration interval can be chosen between 3 h and 12 h when misoprostol is given vaginally. If administration is sublingual, the intervals between misoprostol doses need to be short, but side-effects are then increased. With 12-h intervals, vaginal route should be used, whereas with 3-h intervals either route could be chosen.
米索前列醇诱导流产的最有效给药途径及多次给药的最佳间隔时间尚未明确。我们的目的是评估多次服用米索前列醇的间隔时间及给药途径对终止妊娠的影响。
2066名妊娠63天及以内、要求药物流产的健康孕妇在六个国家的11个妇科中心被随机分配至四个治疗组(三组均给予0.8毫克米索前列醇,分别为舌下含服,间隔3小时;阴道给药,间隔3小时;舌下含服,间隔12小时;阴道给药,间隔12小时),并按孕周分层。这是一项等效性试验,等效性界值为5%。主要终点是实现完全流产和终止妊娠的治疗效果。主要疗效分析排除失访妇女。本试验已注册为国际标准随机对照试验,注册号为ISRCTN10531821。
对2046名妇女(99%)进行了疗效分析,排除20名失访者。米索前列醇间隔3小时给药时,2周随访时舌下含服组431名(84%)和阴道给药组434名(85%)妇女记录到完全流产率(差异0.4%,95%CI -4.0至4.9,p = 0.85,显示等效);间隔12小时给药时,舌下含服组399名(78%)和阴道给药组425名(83%)妇女记录到完全流产率(4.6%,-0.2至9.5,p = 0.06,未显示等效)。在间隔为3小时的组中,舌下含服后29名(6%)妇女和阴道给药后20名(4%)妇女妊娠继续(差异1.8%,95%CI -0.8至4.4,p = 0.19,显示等效);在间隔为12小时的组中,舌下含服后47名(9%)妇女和阴道给药后25名(5%)妇女妊娠继续(4.4%,1.2 - 7.5,p = 0.01,阴道给药优于舌下含服)。舌下含服和阴道给药途径不同间隔时间的完全流产差异分别为6%(95%CI 1.0 - 10.6,p = 0.02,3小时优于12小时)和2%(-2.9至6.1,p = 0.49,未显示等效);继续妊娠的差异分别为4%(0.4 - 6.8,p = 0.03,3小时优于12小时)和1%(-1.5至3.5,p = 0.44,显示等效)。
阴道给药米索前列醇时,给药间隔可在3小时至12小时之间选择。如果是舌下含服,米索前列醇剂量间隔需短,但副作用会增加。间隔12小时时,应采用阴道给药途径;间隔3小时时,两种途径均可选择。