Comparison of vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for second trimester abortion: randomized controlled equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: To identify an effective misoprostol-only regimen for the termination of second trimester pregnancy, we compared sublingual and vaginal administration of multiple doses of misoprostol in a randomized, placebo-controlled equivalence trial. METHODS: Six hundred and eighty-one healthy pregnant women requesting medical abortion at 13-20 weeks' gestation were randomly assigned within 11 gynaecological centres in seven countries into two treatment groups: 400 microg of misoprostol administered either sublingually or vaginally every 3 h up to five doses, followed by sublingual administration of 400 microg misoprostol every 3 h up to five doses if abortion had not occurred at 24 h after the start of treatment. We chose 10% as the margin of equivalence. The primary end-point was the efficacy of the treatments to terminate pregnancy in 24 h. Successful abortion within 48 h was also considered as an outcome along with the induction-to-abortion-interval, side effects and women's perceptions on these treatments. RESULTS: At 24 h, the success (complete or incomplete abortion) rate was 85.9% in the vaginal administration group and 79.8% in the sublingual group (difference: 6.1%, 95% CI: 0.5 to 11.8). Thus, equivalence could not be concluded overall; the difference, however, was driven by the nulliparous women, among whom vaginal administration was clearly superior to sublingual administration (87.3% versus 68.5%), whereas no significant difference was observed between vaginal and sublingual treatments among parous women (84.7% versus 88.5%). The rates of side effects were similar in both groups except for fever, which was more common in the vaginal group. About 70% of women in both groups preferred sublingual administration. CONCLUSIONS: Equivalence between vaginal and sublingual administration could not be demonstrated overall. Vaginal administration showed a higher effectiveness than sublingual administration in terminating second trimester pregnancies, but this result was mainly driven by nulliparous women. Fever was more prevalent with vaginal administration. Registered with International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial number ISRCTN72965671.

Efficacy of two intervals and two routes of administration of misoprostol for termination of early pregnancy: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

BACKGROUND: The most effective route and best interval between several doses of misoprostol to induce abortion have not been defined. Our aim was to assess the effects of the interval between multiple doses of misoprostol and the route of administration to terminate pregnancy. METHODS: 2066 healthy pregnant women requesting medical abortion with 63 days or less of gestation were randomly assigned within 11 gynaecological centres in six countries to the four treatment groups (three doses of 0.8 mg misoprostol given sublingually at 3-h intervals, vaginally 3 h, sublingually 12 h, and vaginally 12 h), stratifying by gestational age. This was an equivalence trial with a 5% margin of equivalence. The primary endpoints were efficacy of treatment to achieve complete abortion and to terminate pregnancy. The main efficacy analysis excluded women lost to follow-up. This trial is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN10531821. FINDINGS: Efficacy outcomes were analysed for 2046 women (99%), excluding 20 lost to follow-up. Complete abortion rates at 2-week follow-up were recorded for 431 (84%) in the sublingual and for 434 (85%) women in the vaginal group when misoprostol was given at 3-h intervals (difference 0.4%, 95% CI -4.0 to 4.9, p=0.85 equivalence shown), and for 399 (78%) in the sublingual and for 425 (83%) in the vaginal 12-h groups (4.6%, -0.2 to 9.5, p=0.06, equivalence not shown). In the 3-h groups, pregnancy continued in 29 (6%) women after sublingual and in 20 (4%) women after vaginal administration (difference 1.8%, 95% CI -0.8 to 4.4, p=0.19, equivalence shown); in the 12-h groups it continued in 47 (9%) after sublingual and in 25 (5%) after vaginal administration (4.4%, 1.2-7.5, p=0.01, vaginal better than sublingual). Differences for complete abortion between intervals for sublingual and vaginal routes were 6% (95% CI 1.0-10.6, p=0.02, 3 h better than 12 h) and 2% (-2.9 to 6.1, p=0.49, equivalence not shown), respectively; for continuing pregnancies they were 4% (0.4-6.8, p=0.03, 3 h better than 12 h) and 1% (-1.5 to 3.5, p=0.44, equivalence shown), respectively. INTERPRETATION: Administration interval can be chosen between 3 h and 12 h when misoprostol is given vaginally. If administration is sublingual, the intervals between misoprostol doses need to be short, but side-effects are then increased. With 12-h intervals, vaginal route should be used, whereas with 3-h intervals either route could be chosen.

Low dose mifepristone and two regimens of levonorgestrel for emergency contraception: a WHO multicentre randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: A single 10 mg dose of mifepristone, and two 0.75 mg doses of levonorgestrel 12 h apart, are effective for emergency contraception. Because no studies had compared the efficacies of both compounds, or investigated a single dose of 1.5 mg levonorgestrel, we undertook this three-arm trial. METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind trial in 15 family-planning clinics in 10 countries. We randomly assigned 4136 healthy women with regular menstrual cycles, who requested emergency contraception within 120 h of one unprotected coitus, to one of three regimens: 10 mg single-dose mifepristone; 1.5 mg single-dose levonorgestrel; or two doses of 0.75 mg levonorgestrel given 12 h apart. The primary outcome was unintended pregnancy; other outcomes were side-effects and timing of next menstruation. Analysis was by intention to treat, but we did exclude some patients from the final analyses. FINDINGS: Of 4071 women with known outcome, pregnancy rates were 1.5% (21/1359) in those given mifepristone, 1.5% (20/1356) in those assigned single-dose levonorgestrel, and 1.8% (24/1356) in women assigned two-dose levonorgestrel. These proportions did not differ significantly (p=0.83). The relative risk of pregnancy for single-dose levonorgestrel compared with two-dose levonorgestrel was 0.83 (95% CI 0.46-1.50), and that for levonorgestrel (the two regimens combined) compared with mifepristone, 1.05 (0.63-1.76). Side-effects were mild and did not differ greatly between groups, and most women menstruated within 2 days of the expected date. Women who took levonorgestrel had earlier menses than did those who took mifepristone. INTERPRETATION: The three regimens studied are very efficacious for emergency contraception and prevent a high proportion of pregnancies if taken within 5 days of unprotected coitus. Mifepristone and levonorgestrel do not differ in efficacy. A 1.5 mg single levonorgestrel dose can substitute two 0.75 mg doses 12 h apart.