File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Vaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal gemeprost in termination of second trimester pregnancy: A randomized trial

TitleVaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal gemeprost in termination of second trimester pregnancy: A randomized trial
Authors
KeywordsGemeprost
Second trimester abortion
Vaginal misoprostol
Issue Date1998
PublisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/contraception
Citation
Contraception, 1998, v. 58 n. 4, p. 207-210 How to Cite?
AbstractA prospective randomized trial was conducted in 140 women to compare the efficacy of vaginal gemeprost with vaginal misoprostol for termination of second trimester pregnancy. Women requesting termination of second trimester pregnancy were randomized into two groups. Group A women were given 1 mg vaginal gemeprost every 3 h for a maximum of five doses in the first 24 h, whereas group B women were given 400 μg vaginal misoprostol every 3 h for a maximum of five doses in 24 h. The median induction-abortion interval in the vaginal misoprostol group (14.1 h) was significantly shorter than that in the gemeprost group (19.5 h). The percentage of women who achieved successful abortion within 24 h in the misoprostol group (80.0%) was significantly higher than that in the gemeprost group (58.6%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects between the two groups except for diarrhea, which was more common in the gemeprost group. The incidence of fever was more common in the misoprostol group. It is concluded that vaginal misoprostol is more effective than gemeprost in termination of second trimester pregnancy. | The efficacies of vaginal gemeprost and vaginal misoprostol for the termination of second-trimester pregnancies were compared in a prospective, randomized trial conducted in Hong Kong, China. 140 women 16-40 years of age requesting pregnancy termination at gestational ages of 14-20 weeks were allocated to receive either 1 mg of gemeprost every 3 hours up to 5 doses (n = 70) or 400 mcg of misoprostol every 3 hours up to 5 doses (n = 70). 56 women (80.0%) in the misoprostol group and 41 (58.6%) in the gemeprost group aborted within 24 hours. In primigravidas, the rate of successful abortion was significantly higher in the misoprostol group (83.3%) than the gemeprost group (55.3%). There were no significant between-group differences in this rate for multigravid women. The median induction-abortion interval was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (14.1 hours) than the gemeprost group (19.5 hours). Blood loss during the procedure was similar in both groups. Although there was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects, diarrhea was less common in misoprostol acceptors (24.3%) than in women who received gemeprost (40.0%). In addition to being more effective at inducing abortion, misoprostol is substantially less expensive than gemeprost and does not require refrigerated transport and storage facilities. Thus, misoprostol, with or without mifepristone, should be the drug of choice for termination of mid-trimester pregnancies. Further studies are needed, however, to determine the optimal dose and frequency of administration.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/87232
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.788
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.557
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWong, KSen_HK
dc.contributor.authorNgai, CSWen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, AYKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorTang, LCHen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHo, PCen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T09:27:02Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T09:27:02Z-
dc.date.issued1998en_HK
dc.identifier.citationContraception, 1998, v. 58 n. 4, p. 207-210en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0010-7824en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/87232-
dc.description.abstractA prospective randomized trial was conducted in 140 women to compare the efficacy of vaginal gemeprost with vaginal misoprostol for termination of second trimester pregnancy. Women requesting termination of second trimester pregnancy were randomized into two groups. Group A women were given 1 mg vaginal gemeprost every 3 h for a maximum of five doses in the first 24 h, whereas group B women were given 400 μg vaginal misoprostol every 3 h for a maximum of five doses in 24 h. The median induction-abortion interval in the vaginal misoprostol group (14.1 h) was significantly shorter than that in the gemeprost group (19.5 h). The percentage of women who achieved successful abortion within 24 h in the misoprostol group (80.0%) was significantly higher than that in the gemeprost group (58.6%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects between the two groups except for diarrhea, which was more common in the gemeprost group. The incidence of fever was more common in the misoprostol group. It is concluded that vaginal misoprostol is more effective than gemeprost in termination of second trimester pregnancy. | The efficacies of vaginal gemeprost and vaginal misoprostol for the termination of second-trimester pregnancies were compared in a prospective, randomized trial conducted in Hong Kong, China. 140 women 16-40 years of age requesting pregnancy termination at gestational ages of 14-20 weeks were allocated to receive either 1 mg of gemeprost every 3 hours up to 5 doses (n = 70) or 400 mcg of misoprostol every 3 hours up to 5 doses (n = 70). 56 women (80.0%) in the misoprostol group and 41 (58.6%) in the gemeprost group aborted within 24 hours. In primigravidas, the rate of successful abortion was significantly higher in the misoprostol group (83.3%) than the gemeprost group (55.3%). There were no significant between-group differences in this rate for multigravid women. The median induction-abortion interval was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (14.1 hours) than the gemeprost group (19.5 hours). Blood loss during the procedure was similar in both groups. Although there was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects, diarrhea was less common in misoprostol acceptors (24.3%) than in women who received gemeprost (40.0%). In addition to being more effective at inducing abortion, misoprostol is substantially less expensive than gemeprost and does not require refrigerated transport and storage facilities. Thus, misoprostol, with or without mifepristone, should be the drug of choice for termination of mid-trimester pregnancies. Further studies are needed, however, to determine the optimal dose and frequency of administration.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherElsevier Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/contraceptionen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofContraceptionen_HK
dc.rightsContraception. Copyright © Elsevier Inc.en_HK
dc.subjectGemeprosten_HK
dc.subjectSecond trimester abortionen_HK
dc.subjectVaginal misoprostolen_HK
dc.titleVaginal misoprostol compared with vaginal gemeprost in termination of second trimester pregnancy: A randomized trialen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0010-7824&volume=58&spage=207&epage=210&date=1998&atitle=Vaginal+misoprostol+compared+with+vaginal+gemeprost+in+termination+of+second+trimester+pregnancy+-+A+randomized+trialen_HK
dc.identifier.emailTang, LCH: lchtang@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailHo, PC: pcho@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityTang, LCH=rp01756en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityHo, PC=rp00325en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0010-7824(98)00099-7en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid9866000en_HK
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0031698045en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros41792en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0031698045&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume58en_HK
dc.identifier.issue4en_HK
dc.identifier.spage207en_HK
dc.identifier.epage210en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000077465600002-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, KS=36341790700en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNgai, CSW=6603676357en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, AYK=7403147449en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridTang, LCH=7402081111en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHo, PC=7402211440en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats