Treatment Options After a Diagnosis of Early Miscarriage: Expectant, Medical, and Surgical.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 12% of pregnancies end in an early miscarriage (up to week 12 + 0 of pregnancy). Over the past 10 to 15 years, two alternatives to curettage have appeared in the pertinent international treatment guidelines: expectant treatment and medical (drug) treatment. In this review, we discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each of these therapeutic options. METHODS: This review is based on pertinent publications (January 2000 to February 2021) retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, as well as on the guidelines of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence/Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics. RESULTS: Three effective and safe treatment options are available after a diagnosis of early miscarriage. Expectant treatment yields success rates of 66-91%, depending on the type of miscarriage. Its complications include hemorrhage requiring blood transfusion in 1-2% of cases. If expectant therapy fails, subsequent treatment with misoprostol or curettage is indicated. Drug therapy with misoprostol yields a complete termination in 81-95% of cases and is thus a valid alternative to expectant therapy, with the advantage of better planning capability. The vaginal application of misoprostol is the most effective means of administration, with the fewest side effects. Curettage is needed in 5-20% of cases. Suctional curettage has a success rate of 97-98%, with an associated anesthesia-related risk of 0.2%, a 0.1% risk of perforation, and a 2-3% rate of repeat curettage. CONCLUSION: If there is no acute indication for the surgical treatment of an early miscarriage, the patient can choose among three treatment options. Expectant and medical treatment can be provided on an outpatient basis. Curettage is the treatment of choice in the presence of infection, marked and persistent bleeding, hemodynamic instability, or a pre-existing coagulopathy.

Adjuvant chemoradiation after laparoscopically assisted vaginal radical hysterectomy (LARVH) in patients with cervical cancer: oncologic outcome and morbidity.

PURPOSE: Compared to laparotomic surgery, laparoscopically assisted radical vaginal hysterectomy (LARVH) offers decreased blood loss during surgery and faster convalescence of the patient postoperatively, while at the same time delivering similar oncologic results. However, there is no data on outcome and toxicity of LARVH followed by (chemo)radiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 55 patients (range 28-78 years) with cervical cancer on FIGO stages IB1-IIIA (Tables 1 and 2) with risk factors were submitted to either external beam radiotherapy alone [EBRT, n = 8 (14%), including paraaortic irradiation, n = 4 (2.2%); EBRT and brachytherapy (BT), n = 33 (60%); BT alone, n = 14 (25.5%)] or chemoradiation after LARVH. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 4.4 years, the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 81.8% with 84.5% overall survival (OS). Acute grade 3 side effects were seen in 4 patients. These were mainly gastrointestinal (GI) and genitourinary (GU) symptoms. Grade 4 side effects were not observed. CONCLUSION: With similar oncologic outcome data and mostly mild side effects, LARVH followed by (chemo)radiation is a valid alternative in the treatment of cervical cancer patients.