File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Oral misoprostol versus mifepristone for cervical dilatation before vacuum aspiration in first trimester nulliparous pregnancy: A double blind prospective randomised study

TitleOral misoprostol versus mifepristone for cervical dilatation before vacuum aspiration in first trimester nulliparous pregnancy: A double blind prospective randomised study
Authors
Issue Date1996
PublisherBlackwell Publishing Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/BJOG
Citation
British Journal Of Obstetrics And Gynaecology, 1996, v. 103 n. 11, p. 1120-1123 How to Cite?
AbstractObjective - To compare the effectiveness of oral misoprostol and mifepristone for cervical priming before first trimester termination of nulliparous pregnancy. Design - Prospective double blind randomised study. Setting - Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Hong Kong. Participants - One hundred nulliparous women undergoing termination of pregnancy between 8 and 12 weeks of gestation were recruited for this prospective randomised trial. The women were allocated to either the oral misoprostol or mifepristone group. Subjects in misoprostol group were given placebo and misoprostol 400 μg 36 h and 12 h respectively before vacuum aspiration. Subjects in mifepristone group were given 200 mg mifepristone and placebo 36 h and 12 h respectively prior to operation. Main outcome measures - Baseline pre-operative cervical dilatation, the incidence of side-effects, the amount of blood loss and duration of procedure. Results - There were no significant differences in the baseline cervical dilatation, incidence of side-effects, amount of blood loss and duration of procedure. Conclusions - Misoprostol and mifepristone are of similar effectiveness for cervical priming prior to vacuum aspiration in nulliparous women. Misoprostol has additional advantages of-being widely available and inexpensive.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/173218
ISSN
2001 Impact Factor: 2.321
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNgai, SWen_US
dc.contributor.authorYeung, KCAen_US
dc.contributor.authorLao, Ten_US
dc.contributor.authorHo, PCen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-30T06:28:35Z-
dc.date.available2012-10-30T06:28:35Z-
dc.date.issued1996en_US
dc.identifier.citationBritish Journal Of Obstetrics And Gynaecology, 1996, v. 103 n. 11, p. 1120-1123en_US
dc.identifier.issn0306-5456en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/173218-
dc.description.abstractObjective - To compare the effectiveness of oral misoprostol and mifepristone for cervical priming before first trimester termination of nulliparous pregnancy. Design - Prospective double blind randomised study. Setting - Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Hong Kong. Participants - One hundred nulliparous women undergoing termination of pregnancy between 8 and 12 weeks of gestation were recruited for this prospective randomised trial. The women were allocated to either the oral misoprostol or mifepristone group. Subjects in misoprostol group were given placebo and misoprostol 400 μg 36 h and 12 h respectively before vacuum aspiration. Subjects in mifepristone group were given 200 mg mifepristone and placebo 36 h and 12 h respectively prior to operation. Main outcome measures - Baseline pre-operative cervical dilatation, the incidence of side-effects, the amount of blood loss and duration of procedure. Results - There were no significant differences in the baseline cervical dilatation, incidence of side-effects, amount of blood loss and duration of procedure. Conclusions - Misoprostol and mifepristone are of similar effectiveness for cervical priming prior to vacuum aspiration in nulliparous women. Misoprostol has additional advantages of-being widely available and inexpensive.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/BJOGen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBritish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecologyen_US
dc.rightsBritish Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. Copyright © Blackwell Publishing Ltd.-
dc.subject.meshAbortifacient Agents, Nonsteroidal - Administration & Dosage - Adverse Effectsen_US
dc.subject.meshAbortion, Induced - Methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshAdministration, Oralen_US
dc.subject.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshDouble-Blind Methoden_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshMifepristone - Administration & Dosage - Adverse Effectsen_US
dc.subject.meshMisoprostol - Administration & Dosage - Adverse Effectsen_US
dc.subject.meshParityen_US
dc.subject.meshPregnancyen_US
dc.subject.meshPregnancy Trimester, Firsten_US
dc.subject.meshProspective Studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshTabletsen_US
dc.subject.meshUterine Hemorrhage - Chemically Induceden_US
dc.subject.meshVacuum Extraction, Obstetricalen_US
dc.titleOral misoprostol versus mifepristone for cervical dilatation before vacuum aspiration in first trimester nulliparous pregnancy: A double blind prospective randomised studyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailHo, PC:pcho@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityHo, PC=rp00325en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1471-0528.1996.tb09594.x-
dc.identifier.pmid8917000-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0029804169en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros21496-
dc.identifier.volume103en_US
dc.identifier.issue11en_US
dc.identifier.spage1120en_US
dc.identifier.epage1123en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:A1996VR35300016-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNgai, SW=7006074214en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYeung, KCA=21642798700en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLao, T=35327208900en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHo, PC=7402211440en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats