Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of misoprostol versus gemeprost for the first and second-trimester induction of abortion. Methods We searched randomized controlled trials（RCTs） and quasi-randomized controlled trials of misoprostol versus gemeprost for the first and second-trimester induction of abortion operation. MEDLINE （1974 - 2003 ）, EMBASE （1974 - 2003 ）, The Cochrane Library （Issue 3, 2003 ）, CBM （1979 - 2003 ）, CNKI （1989 - 2003 ）, CMCC （1994 - 2003 ）, VIP （1989 - 2003 ） were searched. Twelve journals and reference lists of eligible studies were handsearched. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for eligibility, evaluated the quality, and extracted data from eligible studies with confirmation by cross checking. Any disputes were decided by a third person. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 4.2 software. Results Seven RCTs were included, three for the first-trimester and four for the second- trimester. Statictical differences were tested between the misoprostol and gemeprost groups with OR 4. 79,95% CI 1.35 to 16.94 in laxation and dilation rate,with WMD -1.50,95% CI -3.00 to 0.00 in operation time for the first-trimester abortion. However, there was no statistical difference in the amount of bleeding during operation with WMD - 14. 40, 95% CI 30.30 to 1.30. For the second-trimester abortion, compared with gemeprost, no consistent results of gravid excluding time were obtained. Compared with gemeprost, the rate of complete abortion was higher and digest system morbidity was lower in misoprostol alone group. But there was no statistical difference between the two groups when they were both combined with mifestone.Conclusions Some evidence indicates that compared with gemeprost, misoprostol may increase laxation and dilation rate of the cervix, shorten gravid exclusion time, improve the rate of complete abortion and make the laxation and dilation range of the cerix larger than gemeprost before the first and second-trimester abortive surgery. Due to the hmited evidence indentified, we can not draw a b conclusion. More radomiased controlled trails of high quahty are required.
Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of misoprostol for intrauterine insemination (IUI). Methods The Cochrane Library, EMbase, MEDLINE, SCIENCE Direct Database, CBM, Wangfang Data and CNKI were searched for collecting randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials published before October, 2009. Statistical analysis was performed with RevMan 5.0 software. Results Five Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria at last. Five RCTs involving 546 participants and 1 133 cycles are included. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with placebo group, 400 μg misoprostol could increase pregnancy rate of IUI (RR=1.95, 95%CI 1.19 to 3.19); compared with 200 μg misoprostol group, 400 μg misoprostol also has higher incidence rate of abdominal pain (RR=3.13, 95%CI 1.86 to 5.26) and vaginal bleeding (RR=5.25, 95%CI 2.08 to 13.21). Conclusions Because of the limited studies, recommendation of using misoprostol in IUI cycles is not fully convinced, which has to be further proved by more randomized controlled trials in large sample with high quality.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of mifepristone concomitant with misoprostol for medical abortion. Methods We searched the related original studies worldwide, and controlled prospective studies and systematic reviews based on randomized controlled trials （RCTs）. Nine electronic databases were searched. Ten journals and reference lists of eligible studies were handsearched. Two reviewers independently screened the studies for eligibility, evaluated the quality, and extracted the data from eligible studies, with confirmation by cross checking. Any disputes were decided by a third person. Meta-analysis was conducted using statistical software RevMan 4.2. After heterogeneity test was done （α=0.05 ） , data without heterogeneity were pooled using a fixed effect model, and those with heterogeneity could be solved by sensitivity＂ analysis, subgroup analysis or random effect model. Results We found eight original trials （n = 3 348 ） that compared medical abortion with surgical abortion, nine trials （n =6 116） that investigating the effect of gestational ages on medical abortion, five trials （n = 1 934） on the use of mifepristone and two trials （n =2381 ） on intervals of administration of mifepristone and misoprostol were located. Quality of foreign studies was better than that of Chinese studies. Therate of complete abortion was higher in surgical abortion group than that in medical abortion group with odds ratio （OR） 0. 18 and 95% confidence interval （CI） 0. 11 to 0.27. The rate of incomplete abortion and abortion failure was higher in medical abortion group with OR 3.32, and 95% CI 1.79 to 6.17, OR 7.36, 95% CI 4. 17 to 12.98, respectively. The rate of complete abortion in the group with gestational age over 49 days was lower than that with gestational age under 49 days with OR 0.51 and 95% CI 0.43 to 0.61. The rate of incomplete abortion and abortion failure was higher in the group with gestational age over 49 days with OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.09 and OR 3.37, 95% CI 2.30 to 4. 94.There were no significant differences observed in the rates of complete abortion, incomplete abortion, abortion failed, time of expelling pregnant sac and time of menses recovery between the single and multi-dosage of mifepristone. Except for the rate of complete abortion, which was higher in 〈48h group, there was a comparable effectiveness for different intervals of mifepristone and ntisoprostol. Conclusions This review showes that it is important to improve the quality of Chinese original studies. Although the effectiveness is better in the surgical abortion group, the rate of complete abortion of medical abortion achieved is 91.6% （1 648/1 800）. This is acceptable for clinicians and women who do not want to be pregnance. The rate of complete abortion is lower in the gestation over 49 days, which had a statistically difference, but little clinical significance. It is necessary to consider increasing the gestational age of medical abortion, especially for those women who have contradictions of surgical abortion or are afraid of operation. Effectiveness of single dosage of mifeprostone is similar to that ofmulti-dosage, but single dosage might be more convenient. This review suggests that shortening the interval ofmifepristone and misoprostol administration should be considered and the best and shortest interval time need to be identified with better evidence.
目的:探讨米索前列醇片在初次早早孕(≤42天)人工流产术前应用的可行性、有效性及安全性。方法:将300例初次妊娠,孕周≤6周,拟行人工流产的妇女随机分为口服米索组100例(A组)、阴道放置米索组100例(B组)、未使用米索对照组(C组)。A组术前2h口服米索前列醇片400 μg,B组术前2h阴道放置米索前列醇片400 μg。观察并比较术前用药的两组不良反应发生率、宫颈扩张效果、术中出血量、手术时间及术后宫颈粘连发生情况。结果:B组不良反应发生率低于A组,差异有统计学意义(Plt;0.01);A、B两组间术中宫颈扩张效果、术中出血量、手术时间及术后宫颈粘连发生率差异均无统计学意义(Pgt;0.05),但与C组比较差异有统计学意义。结论:米索前列醇片口服和阴道放药都可作为初次早早孕人工流产术前的给药方法。更推荐不良反应较小的阴道放药。
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of moistened versus dry misoprostol for mid-trimester pregnancy termination. MethodsDatabases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2015), Web of Science, WanFang Data, CBM and CNKI were searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about misoprostol for mid-trimester pregnancy termination from inception to Nov. 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. ResultsFive RCTs involving 742 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that, compared with dry tablet, moistened tablet could reduce induction-abortion interval (MD=-0.41, 95% CI-0.75 to-0.08, P=0.02), while there were no significant differences between two groups in completely abortion within 24 hours or 48 hours, nausea, vomiting, chill, fever, diarrhea, retained placenta, blood loss and total dose of misoprostol. ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that, compared with the dry misoprostol, the moistened misoprostol for treating mid-trimester pregnancy termination could reduce the induction-abortion interval without increasing adverse reactions. Due to the limited quality of quantity of included studies, more high-quality and large-scale RCTs are needed to prove the above conclusion.