Management of first trimester miscarriage; new insight in old dilemmas

In this thesis and the related thesis by Marike Lemmers ‘Outcomes of treatment for first trimester miscarriage’ we describe the short and long term effects of misoprostol and curettage in the treatment of first trimester miscarriage. The first part describes current practice in miscarriage treatment. We provide an overview of the three treatment options: surgical, medical and expectant management. We conducted a systematic review (Cochrane) to investigate the most optimal regimen for medical treatment. Furthermore we describe the results of a nationwide survey on treatment of first trimester miscarriage. Although medical treatment is available in virtually all Dutch hospitals, there is still a large practice variation. The second part provides an overview of incidences of acute complications after surgical treatment for miscarriage, and compares these complications to those of medical treatment and/or expectant management. The third part describes the management of an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage. Although women with an incomplete evacuation are often relatively asymptomatic, a curettage is often performed. We conducted a randomized controlled trial, comparing curettage to expectant management. A cohort study was conducted alongside this trial following women who received treatment of their preference. These studies show, that although curettage is slightly more effective, expectant management is safe and effective in at least 5 out of 6 women. Patients had a strong preference for a specific treatment type. The most important factors on which they base their preference were probability of success and risk of reduced fertility

Practice variation in the management of first trimester miscarriage in the Netherlands: a nationwide survey

Objectives. To survey practice variation in the management of first trimester miscarriage in The Netherlands. Methods. We sent an online questionnaire to gynecologists in eight academic, 37 nonacademic teaching, and 47 nonteaching hospitals. Main outcome measures were availability of a local protocol; estimated number of patients treated with curettage, misoprostol, or expectant management; misoprostol regimen; and estimated number of curettages performed after initial misoprostol treatment. Outcomes were compared to the results of a previous nationwide survey. Results. The response rate was 100%. A miscarriage protocol was present in all academic hospitals, 68% of nonacademic teaching hospitals, and 38% of nonteaching hospitals (P = 0.008). Misoprostol was first-choice treatment for 41% of patients in academic hospitals versus 34% and 27% in teaching-and nonteaching hospitals (P = 0.045). There were 23 different misoprostol regimens. Curettage was first-choice treatment in 29% of patients in academic hospitals versus 46% and 50% in nonacademic teaching or nonteaching hospitals (P = 0.007). In 30% of patients, initial misoprostol treatment was followed by curettage. Conclusions. Although the percentage of gynaecologists who are aware of the availability of misoprostol for miscarriage treatment has doubled to almost 100% since 2005, practice variation is still large. This practice variation underlines the need for a national guidelin

Factors influencing women's preferences for subsequent management in the event of incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage

STUDY QUESTION: What affects women's treatment preferences in the management of an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for a first-trimester miscarriage? SUMMARY ANSWER: Women's treatment preferences in the management of an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage are most strongly influenced by 'the risk of a reduced fertility' followed by 'the probability of success'. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Available treatment options in miscarriage are surgical, medical or expectant management. Treatment with misoprostol leads to an incomplete evacuation of the uterus and additional surgical treatment in 20-50% of women. To our knowledge, women's preferences for subsequent treatment of an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage have not been studied yet. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Between April 2014 and January 2015, we conducted a prospective nationwide multicentre discrete-choice experiment (DCE). DCEs have become the most frequently applied approach for studying patient preferences in health care. In our DCE, which considerers five attributes, a target sample size was calculated including 20 patients per attribute for the main analysis. We intended to include 25% more patients, i.e. a total of 125 thus enabling us to assess heterogeneity of treatment choices. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All women visiting the outpatient clinic with first-trimester miscarriage or incomplete miscarriage were invited to participate in the study. Women under 18 years of age, women who were unable to understand the Dutch questionnaire or women who already had received a treatment for the current miscarriage were excluded. Women's preferences were assessed using a DCE. A literature review, expert opinions and interviews with women from the general population were used to define relevant treatment characteristics. Five attributes were selected: (i) certainty about the duration of convalescence; (ii) number of days of bleeding after treatment; (iii) probability of success (empty uterus after treatment); (iv) risk of reduced fertility and (v) risk of complications requiring more time or readmission to hospital. Fourteen scenarios using these attributes were selected in the DCE. Each of these scenarios presented two treatment options, while treatment characteristics varied between the 14 scenarios. For each scenario, respondents were asked to choose the preferred treatment option. The importance of each attribute was analysed, and preference heterogeneity was investigated through latent-class analysis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: One hundred and eighty-six women were included of whom 128 completed the DCE (69% response rate). The two attributes with the greatest effect on their preference were, probability of success and risk of reduced fertility. The latent-class analysis revealed two subgroups of patients with different preference patterns. Forty per cent of women were more influenced by treatment success and 59% were more influenced by risk. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Most women were highly educated and were of Dutch origin, which limits the generalizability of our findings. Women with lower education levels, other cultural backgrounds and/or different previous experiences may differ from our findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Patients preferences should be addressed when counselling patients with an incomplete miscarriage after misoprostol treatmen

Medical treatment for early fetal death (Less than 24 weeks)

Background In most pregnancies that miscarry, arrest of embryonic or fetal development occurs some time (often weeks) before the miscarriage occurs. Ultrasound examination can reveal abnormal findings during this phase by demonstrating anembryonic pregnancies or embryonic or fetal death. Treatment has traditionally been surgical but medical treatments may be effective, safe, and acceptable, as may be waiting for spontaneous miscarriage. This is an update of a review first published in 2006. Objectives To assess, from clinical trials, the effectiveness and safety of different medical treatments for the termination of non-viable pregnancies. Search methods For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth’s Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (24 October 2018) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria Randomised trials comparing medical treatment with another treatment (e.g. surgical evacuation), or placebo, or no treatment for early pregnancy failure. Quasi-randomised studies were excluded. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion, as were studies reported in abstract form, if sufficient information was available to assess eligibility. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Main results Forty-three studies (4966 women) were included. The main interventions examined were vaginal, sublingual, oral and buccal misoprostol, mifepristone and vaginal gemeprost. These were compared with surgical management, expectant management, placebo, or different types of medical interventions were compared with each other. The review includes a wide variety of different interventions which have been analysed across 23 different comparisons. Many of the comparisons consist of single studies. We limited the grading of the quality of evidence to two main comparisons: vaginal misoprostol versus placebo and vaginal misoprostol versus surgical evacuation of the uterus. Risk of bias varied widely among the included trials. The quality of the evidence varied between the different comparisons, but was mainly found to be very-low or low quality. Vaginal misoprostol versus placebo Vaginal misoprostol may hasten miscarriage when compared with placebo: e.g. complete miscarriage (5 trials, 305 women, risk ratio (RR) 4.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.01 to 5.94; low-quality evidence). No trial reported on pelvic infection rate for this comparison. Vaginal misoprostol made little difference to rates of nausea (2 trials, 88 women, RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.43 to 4.40; low-quality evidence), diarrhoea (2 trials, 88 women, RR 2.21, 95% CI 0.35 to 14.06; low-quality evidence) or to whether women were satisfied with the acceptability of the method (1 trial, 32 women, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.64; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether vaginal misoprostol reduces blood loss (haemoglobin difference > 10 g/L) (1 trial, 50 women, RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.12; very-low quality) or pain (opiate use) (1 trial, 84 women, RR 5.00, 95% CI 0.25 to 101.11; very-low quality), because the quality of the evidence for these outcomes was found to be very low. Vaginal misoprostol versus surgical evacuation Vaginal misoprostol may be less effective in accomplishing a complete miscarriage compared to surgical management (6 trials, 943 women, average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.50; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.03, I² = 46%; low-quality evidence) and may be associated with more nausea (1 trial, 154 women, RR 21.85, 95% CI 1.31 to 364.37; low-quality evidence) and diarrhoea (1 trial, 154 women, RR 40.85, 95% CI 2.52 to 662.57; low-quality evidence). There may be little or no difference between vaginal misoprostol and surgical evacuation for pelvic infection (1 trial, 618 women, RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.37; low-quality evidence), blood loss (post-treatment haematocrit (%) (1 trial, 50 women, mean difference (MD) 1.40%, 95% CI-3.51 to 0.71; low-quality evidence), pain relief (1 trial, 154 women, RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.46; low-quality evidence) or women’s satisfaction/acceptability of method (1 trial, 45 women, RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.11; low-quality evidence). Other comparisons Based on findings from a single trial, vaginal misoprostol was more effective at accomplishing complete miscarriage than expectant management (614 women, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.45). There was little difference between vaginal misoprostol and sublingual misoprostol (5 trials, 513 women, average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.16; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.10, I² = 871%; or between oral and vaginal misoprostol in terms of complete miscarriage at less than 13 weeks (4 trials, 418 women), average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.03; Heterogeneity: Tau² = 0.13, I² = 90%). However, there was less abdominal pain with vaginal misoprostol in comparison to sublingual (3 trials, 392 women, RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.74). A single study (46 women) found mifepristone to be more effective than placebo: miscarriage complete by day five after treatment (46 women, RR 9.50, 95% CI 2.49 to 36.19). However the quality of this evidence is very low: there is a very serious risk of bias with signs of incomplete data and no proper intention-to-treat analysis in the included study; and serious imprecision with wide confidence intervals. Mifepristone did not appear to further hasten miscarriage when added to a misoprostol regimen (3 trials, 447 women, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.47). Authors’ conclusions Available evidence from randomised trials suggests that medical treatment with vaginal misoprostol may be an acceptable alternative to surgical evacuation or expectant management. In general, side effects of medical treatment were minor, consisting mainly of nausea and diarrhoea. There were no major differences in effectiveness between different routes of administration. Treatment satisfaction was addressed in only a few studies, in which the majority of women were satisfied with the received intervention. Since the quality of evidence is low or very low for several comparisons, mainly because they included only one or two (small) trials; further research is necessary to assess the effectiveness, safety and side effects, optimal route of administration and dose of different medical treatments for early fetal death

Behandelopties voor vroege miskramen; nieuwe inzichten

Miscarriage is the most common complication during the first trimester of pregnancy. Three treatment options are available for women who experience early miscarriage: expectant management, curettage, or medical treatment. Curettage has traditionally been the usual treatment, but both expectant management and medical management with misoprostol are more cost-effective. Curettage increases the risk of surgical complications and intra-uterine adhesions (Asherman syndrome), and is associated with preterm birth. After adequate counselling, the woman's preference is a decisive factor; the choice of treatment for early miscarriage lends itself ideally to shared decision making. The Netherlands lacks a multidisciplinary guideline on the treatment of women following miscarriag

MisoREST: Surgical versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage: A cohort study

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of curettage versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage. Study design: We conducted a multicenter cohort study alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT) between June 2012 until July 2014. 27 Dutch hospitals participated. Women with an incomplete evacuation after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage who declined to participate in the RCT, received treatment of their preference; curettage (n = 65) or expectant management (n = 132). A successful outcome was defined as an empty uterus on sonography at six weeks or uneventful clinical follow-up. We furthermore assessed complication rate and (re)intervention rate Results: Of the 197 women who declined to participate in the RCT, 65 preferred curettage and 132 expectant management. A successful outcome was observed in 62/65 women (95%) in the surgical group versus 112/132 women (85%) in the expectant group (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.03-1.2), with complication rates of 6.2% versus 2.3%, respectively (RR 2.7, 95% CI 0.6-12). Conclusion: In women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment, expectant management is an effective and safe option. This finding could restrain the use of curettage in women that have used misoprostol in the treatment of first trimester miscarriage. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

MisoREST : Surgical versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage: A cohort study

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of curettage versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a multicenter cohort study alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT) between June 2012 until July 2014. 27 Dutch hospitals participated. Women with an incomplete evacuation after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage who declined to participate in the RCT, received treatment of their preference; curettage (n=65) or expectant management (n=132). A successful outcome was defined as an empty uterus on sonography at six weeks or uneventful clinical follow-up. We furthermore assessed complication rate and (re)intervention rate RESULTS: Of the 197 women who declined to participate in the RCT, 65 preferred curettage and 132 expectant management. A successful outcome was observed in 62/65 women (95%) in the surgical group versus 112/132 women (85%) in the expectant group (RR 1.1, 95% CI 1.03-1.2), with complication rates of 6.2% versus 2.3%, respectively (RR 2.7, 95% CI 0.6-12). CONCLUSION: In women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment, expectant management is an effective and safe option. This finding could restrain the use of curettage in women that have used misoprostol in the treatment of first trimester miscarriage