Kasr Al-Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt; Medical Research Group of Egypt, Egypt.
Medical Research Group of Egypt, Egypt; Faculty of Medicine, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019 Dec;243:111-119. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2019.10.023. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
There is great controversy regarding the most effective route for cervical priming before diagnostic or operative hysteroscopy.
To evaluate the evidence from published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) about the efficacy and safety of oral vs vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming before hysteroscopy.
Electronic databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science were searched using the relevant keywords.
All RCTs assessing the effect of oral vs vaginal misoprostol before hysteroscopy for cervical priming were considered. One hundred and ten studies were identified, of which eight studies were deemed eligible for this review.
The extracted outcomes were: cervical canal width, ease of dilatation, time for cervical dilatation and adverse effects (nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, bleeding, fever, abdominal pain/uterine cramping and any complications during the procedure). All statistical analyses were completed using RevMan.
Eight RCTs with 768 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Cervical canal width did not differ significantly between the two routes of misoprostol administration [mean difference -0.25 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.92-0.42; p = 0.47]. However, the vaginal route was significantly superior to the oral route for reducing the time for cervical dilatation (standardized mean difference 0.17, 95% CI 0.02-0.32; p = 0.03). No significant differences in adverse effects were found between the routes, except for diarrhoea which was significantly less prevalent with vaginal administration of misoprostol (risk ratio 2.48, 95% CI 1.17-5.26; p = 0.02).
Oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol before hysteroscopy were similar in terms of cervical canal width, ease of dilatation and various adverse effects, except that the vaginal route was associated with faster cervical dilatation and lower prevalence of diarrhoea.
在诊断性或手术性宫腔镜检查前,关于宫颈预处理的最有效途径存在很大争议。
评估已发表的随机临床试验 (RCT) 中关于口服与阴道给予米索前列醇用于宫腔镜检查前宫颈预处理的疗效和安全性的证据。
使用相关关键词检索电子数据库,包括 PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、Scopus 和 Web of Science。
评估口服与阴道给予米索前列醇用于宫腔镜检查前宫颈预处理效果的所有 RCT 均被认为符合纳入标准。共确定了 110 项研究,其中 8 项研究被认为符合本综述的纳入标准。
提取的结局包括:宫颈管宽度、扩张难易程度、宫颈扩张时间和不良反应(恶心、呕吐、腹泻、出血、发热、腹痛/子宫痉挛以及手术过程中的任何并发症)。所有统计分析均使用 RevMan 完成。
共有 8 项 RCT(768 例患者)纳入本 meta 分析。两种米索前列醇给药途径的宫颈管宽度无显著差异[平均差-0.25 mm,95%置信区间 (CI) -0.92-0.42;p = 0.47]。然而,阴道途径在缩短宫颈扩张时间方面明显优于口服途径(标准化均数差 0.17,95% CI 0.02-0.32;p = 0.03)。两种途径的不良反应无显著差异,除了腹泻,阴道给予米索前列醇时腹泻的发生率明显较低(风险比 2.48,95% CI 1.17-5.26;p = 0.02)。
宫腔镜检查前口服和阴道给予米索前列醇在宫颈管宽度、扩张难易程度和各种不良反应方面相似,但阴道途径与宫颈扩张更快和腹泻发生率更低有关。