First dose of misoprostol administration at home or in hospital for medical abortion between 12-22 gestational weeks in Sweden (PRIMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Medical abortion after 12 gestational weeks often requires a stay in hospital. We hypothesised that administering the first misoprostol dose at home could increase day-care procedures as compared with overnight care procedures, shorten inpatient stays, and improve patient satisfaction. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial was done at six hospitals in Sweden. Participants were pregnant people aged 18 years and older who were undergoing medical abortion at 85-153 days of pregnancy. Randomisation was done in blocks 1:1 to mifepristone administered in-clinic followed by home administration or hospital administration of the first dose of misoprostol. Allocation was done by opening of opaque allocation envelopes. Due to the nature of the intervention, masking was not feasible. Between 24-48 h after mifepristone 200 mg, the participants administered 800 µg of misoprostol either at home 2 h before admission to hospital or in hospital. The primary outcome was the proportion of day-care procedures (defined as abortion completed in <9 h). The intention-to-treat analysis included all participants randomly assigned to receive the study drug and who had known results for the primary outcome. Individuals who received any treatment were included in the safety analyses. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NTC03600857, and EudraCT, 2018-000964-27. FINDINGS: Between Jan 8, 2019, and Dec 21, 2022, 457 participants were randomly assigned to treatment groups. In the intention-to-treat-population, 220 participants were assigned to the home group and 215 to the hospital group. In the home group, 156 (71%) of 220 participants completed the abortion as day-care patients, compared with 99 (46%) of 215 in the hospital group (difference 24·9%, 95% CI 15·4-34·3; p<0·0001). In total, 97 (22%) of 444 participants in the safety analysis had an adverse event. Seven (2%) of 444 participants aborted after mifepristone only. Two (1%) of 220 in the home group aborted after the first dose of misoprostol, before hospital admission. INTERPRETATION: Home administration of misoprostol significantly increases the proportion of day-care procedures in medical abortion after 12 gestational weeks, offering a safe and effective alternative to in-clinic protocols. FUNDING: Region Västra Götaland, Hjalmar Svensson's Fund, the Gothenburg Society of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet-Region Stockholm, and The Swedish Research Council.

The Success of Mifepristone and Misoprostol in the Management of Early Pregnancy Loss at a Community Hospital: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: This prospective single-arm study was conducted to understand the expulsion rate of the gestational sac in the management of early pregnancy loss (EPL). METHODS: We recruited 441 participants; 188 met the eligibility criteria. Participants were 18 years of age and older who experienced a confirmed EPL (<12 weeks gestational age) defined by an intrauterine pregnancy with a non-viable embryonic or anembryonic gestational sac with no fetal heart activity. Participants were given 200 mg of mifepristone pre-treatment orally followed by 2 doses of misoprostol 800 µg vaginally after 24 and 48 hours. Participants were seen in follow-up on day 14 to confirm the absence of a gestational sac, classified as treatment success. For failed treatment (defined by retained gestational sac), we offered expectant management or a third dose of misoprostol and/or dilatation and curettage. We followed all participants for 30 days. We collected data on overtreatment for retained products of conception and hospital admissions for adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 181 participants followed the protocol and 169 (93.3%) participants had a complete expulsion of the gestational sac by the second visit (day 14). Twelve (6.6%) failed the treatment and 1 had an adverse event of heavy vaginal bleeding requiring dilatation and curettage. Despite the expulsion of the gestational sac, 29 cases (17.1%) at subsequent follow-up were diagnosed as retained products of conception based on ultrasound assessment of thickened endometrium. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with mifepristone followed by 2 doses of misoprostol with a 14-day follow-up resulted in a high expulsion rate and is a safe management option for EPL.

The Safety and Efficacy of a "No Touch" Abortion Program Implemented in the Greater Toronto Area During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of first-trimester "No Touch" medication abortion programs at 2 clinics in Toronto, Ontario during their early implementation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients who underwent virtual consultation for mifepristone-misoprostol medication abortion between April 2020-August 2022 at 2 reproductive health clinics. In response to the pandemic, "No Touch" abortion protocols have been developed that align with the Canadian Protocol for the Provision of Medical Abortion via Telemedicine. Records were reviewed for demographic information, clinical course, investigations required, confirmation of complete abortion and adverse events. The primary outcome was complete medication abortion, defined as expulsion of the pregnancy without requiring uterine aspiration. RESULTS: A total of 277 patients had abortions initiated in the "No Touch" or "Low Touch" care pathways and had sufficient follow-up to determine outcomes. Of these patients, 92.8% (95% CI 89.7%-95.8%) had a complete medication abortion (n = 257) and 76.1% (n = 159) remained "No Touch" throughout their care. Investigations were performed for 102 participants before or after their abortion, classifying them as "Low Touch". Nineteen patients (6.9%) underwent uterine aspiration. The rate of adverse events was low, with 1 case of a missed ectopic pregnancy and 1 patient requiring hospitalization for endometritis. CONCLUSIONS: "No Touch" provision of mifepristone-misoprostol medication abortion care was safe and effective with outcomes comparable to previous studies. These results provide evidence for the efficacy and safety of a "No Touch" approach in the Canadian context, which has the potential to reduce barriers to accessing abortion care.

Access to mifepristone, misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines in eight countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: descriptive analyses of country-level assessments.

BACKGROUND: Despite their importance in reducing maternal mortality, information on access to Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines in the Eastern Mediterranean Region is limited. METHODS: A standardized assessment tool measuring access to Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines included in the WHO essential medicines list (EML) was implemented in eight countries in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Palestine, Pakistan, and Somalia) between 2020-2021. The assessment focused on five access measures: 1) the inclusion of medicines in national family planning guidelines; 2) inclusion of medicines in comprehensive abortion care guidelines; 3) inclusion of medicines on national essential medicines lists; 4) medicines registration; and 5) procurement and forecasting of Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines. A descriptive analysis of findings from these eight national assessments was conducted. RESULTS: Only Lebanon and Pakistan included all 12 contraceptives that are enlisted in the WHO-EML within their national family planning guidelines. Only Afghanistan and Lebanon included mifepristone and mifepristone-misoprostol combination in post-abortion care guidelines, but these medicines were not included in their national EMLs. Libya and Somalia lacked a national regulatory authority for medicines registration. Most contraceptives included on the national EMLs for Lebanon, Morocco and Pakistan were registered. Misoprostol was included on the EMLs-and registered-in six countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and Pakistan). However, only three countries procured misoprostol (Iraq, Morocco, and Somalia). CONCLUSION: These findings can guide efforts aimed at improving the availability of Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. Opportunities include expanding national EMLs to include more options for Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines and strengthening the registration and procurement systems to ensure these medicines' availability were permitted under national law and where culturally acceptable.

Ensuring access to Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines is critical to improving women's health, and more specifically reducing maternal mortality and improving women's sexual and reproductive health in the Eastern Mediterranean Region.The aim of this study was to analyse findings from national assessments to capture information on the implementation of relevant policies and procedures. Those were the policies that ensure access to Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines in the public sector for the eight Eastern Mediterranean Region countries included in the study (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, Pakistan, and Somalia). The assessments were completed between 2020 and 2021.We found that most countries did not include all twelve contraceptives enlisted in the WHO essential medicines list (EML) in their national family planning guidelines. No country had developed a national abortion care guidelines nor included mifepristone (alone or in combination with misoprostol) on national EML. Libya and Somalia lacked a national regulatory authority for medicines registration. Most contraceptives included on the national EMLs for Lebanon, Morocco and Pakistan were registered. Misoprostol was included on the EMLs­and registered­in six countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and Pakistan) yet, only three countries procured misoprostol (Iraq, Morocco, and Somalia).Our findings provide evidence on system-level barriers to availability of Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines (e.g., lack of guidelines or inclusion on EML, lack of registration and procurement) that can support policy and advocacy efforts to strengthen the pharmaceutical sector to better ensure availability of Mifepristone, Misoprostol, and contraceptive medicines to women in reproductive age at the country-level in accordance with the national law and prevailing culture.

Risk of teratogenicity in continued pregnancy after gestational exposure to mifepristone and/or misoprostol: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively assess the teratogenic risk to offspring associated with continuing pregnancy after administering mifepristone and/or misoprostol during gestation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, CNKI, and CBM, from their inception to February 2024, with no language restrictions. We included cohort and case-control studies that analyzed the teratogenic effects of mifepristone and/or misoprostol on fetuses and newborns. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The odds ratios (OR) from individual studies were combined using meta-analysis. Sensitivity testing and heterogeneity analysis were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were eligible for inclusion, comprising 5193 cases of congenital malformations and 12,232 controls. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicated that the use of misoprostol during early pregnancy increased the risk of congenital abnormalities in offspring (OR = 2.69; 95% CI: 1.57-4.62). However, the potential teratogenic effect of mifepristone during pregnancy cannot be ruled out. Additionally, the use of mifepristone and/or misoprostol has been linked to a higher risk of certain congenital anomalies, such as hydrocephalus (OR = 3.41; 95% CI: 1.17-9.97), Möbius syndrome (OR = 26.48; 95% CI: 11.30-62.01), and terminal transverse limb defects (OR = 10.75; 95% CI: 3.93-29.41). (PROSPERO, CRD42024522093, 03182024).

Long-term efficacy and safety of levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system in the treatment of adenomyosis: evidence mapping.

PURPOSE: To summarize evidence on levonorgestrel releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) in the treatment of adenomyosis (AM) and to identify potential research gaps. METHODS: Search was conducted in MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CBM, CNKI, and Wanfang. We included studies investigating patients with AM treated with LNG-IUS combined with conservative therapy. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies compared LNG-IUS with other conservative therapeutic drugs. The most common comparison was GnRH-a + LNG-IUS vs. LNG-IUS alone, followed by LNG-IUS vs. mifepristone, expected treatment, and GnRH-a. GnRH-a + LNG-IUS was more beneficial in reducing the intensity of dysmenorrhea than LNG-IUS alone at the 6-month follow-up in patients with an enlarged uterus and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea. Large and well-designed studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of LNG-IUS and GnRH-a on reducing uterine volume at 6-month follow-up. Thirty-two studies investigated LNG-IUS as the postoperative management. The most common comparison was surgical excision + LNG-IUS vs. surgical excision. Results showed VAS scores were lower in the surgical excision + LNG-IUS group than in the surgical excision group at the 1-year follow-up. Evidence on endometrial thickness, quality of life, adverse events and beneficial effect at 3 and 5 years are needed. CONCLUSIONS: Combined GnRH-a and LNG-IUS treatment was more efficacious than LNG-IUS alone for patients with an enlarged uterus and moderate to severe dysmenorrhea. Moreover, LNG-IUS seemed to show potential long-term benefits in postoperative therapy, warranting further meta-analysis for confirmation.

Abortion Stigma as a Barrier to Mifepristone Use among Obstetrician-Gynecologists in Alabama for Early Pregnancy Loss.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of our study was to identify and characterize barriers to mifepristone use among obstetrician-gynecologists (OB-GYNs) for early pregnancy loss in a southern US state. METHODS: In this qualitative study, we conducted semistructured interviews with 19 OB-GYNs in Alabama who manage early pregnancy loss. The interviews explored participants' knowledge of and experience with mifepristone use for miscarriage management and abortion, along with barriers to and facilitators of clinical mifepristone use. The interviews were coded by multiple study staff using inductive and deductive thematic coding. RESULTS: Nearly all of the interviewees identified abortion-related stigma as a barrier to mifepristone use. Interviewees often attributed stigma to a lack of knowledge about the clinical use of mifepristone for early pregnancy loss. The stigmatization of mifepristone due to its association with abortion was related to religious and political objections. Many interviewees also described stigma associated with misoprostol use. Although providers believed that mifepristone use for abortion would not be accepted in their practice, most believed that mifepristone could be used successfully for miscarriage management after practice-wide education on its use. CONCLUSIONS: Mifepristone is strongly associated with abortion stigma among OB-GYNs in Alabama, which is a barrier to its use for miscarriage management. Interventions to decrease abortion stigma and associated stigma surrounding mifepristone are needed to optimize early pregnancy loss care.

Comparison of No-Test Telehealth and In-Person Medication Abortion.

Importance: In the US, access to medication abortion using history-based (no-test) eligibility assessment, including through telehealth and mailing of mifepristone, has grown rapidly. Additional evidence on the effectiveness and safety of these models is needed. Objective: To evaluate whether medication abortion with no-test eligibility assessment and mailing of medications is as effective as in-person care with ultrasonography and safe overall. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, observational study with noninferiority analysis. Sites included 4 abortion-providing organizations in Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Virginia, and Washington from May 2021 to March 2023. Eligible patients were seeking medication abortion up to and including 70 days' gestation, spoke English or Spanish, and were aged 15 years or older. Exposure: Study groups reflected the model of care selected by the patient and clinicians and included: (1) no-test (telehealth) eligibility assessment and mailing of medications (no-test + mail) (n = 228); (2) no-test eligibility assessment and pickup of medications (no-test + pickup) (n = 119); or (3) in-person with ultrasonography (n = 238). Main Outcomes and Measures: Effectiveness, defined as a complete abortion without the need for repeating the mifepristone and misoprostol regimen or a follow-up procedure, and safety, defined as an abortion-related serious adverse event, including overnight hospital admission, surgery, or blood transfusion. Outcomes were derived from patient surveys and medical records. Primary analysis focused on the comparison of the no-test + mail group with the in-person with ultrasonography group. Results: The mean age of the participants (N = 585) was 27.3 years; most identified as non-Hispanic White (48.6%) or non-Hispanic Black (28.1%). Median (IQR) gestational duration was 45 days (39-53) and comparable between study groups (P = .30). Outcome data were available for 91.8% of participants. Overall effectiveness was 94.4% (95% CI, 90.7%-99.2%) in the no-test + mail group and 93.3% (95% CI, 88.3%-98.2%) in the in-person with ultrasonography group in adjusted models (adjusted risk difference, 1.2 [95% CI, -4.1 to 6.4]), meeting the prespecified 5% noninferiority margin. Serious adverse events included overnight hospitalization (n = 4), blood transfusion (n = 2), and emergency surgery (n = 1) and were reported by 1.1% (95% CI, 0.4%-2.4%) of participants, with 3 in the no-test + mail group, 3 in the in-person with ultrasonography group, and none in the no-test + pickup group. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective, observational study found that medication abortion obtained following no-test telehealth screening and mailing of medications was associated with similar rates of complete abortion compared with in-person care with ultrasonography and met prespecified criteria for noninferiority, with a low prevalence of adverse events.

United Kingdom Data Deficiencies Influencing U.S. FDA Decisions.

The U.S. FDA has permanently removed the in-person prescribing requirements that previously safeguarded the use of mifepristone/misoprostol medical abortions, allowing prescribing through telemedicine or on-line ordering and distribution through the mail and pharmacies, without standard pre-abortion testing. This will increase the risk of complications due to failure to adequately determine the gestational age or rule out ectopic pregnancy by ultrasound or physical exam, failure to perform labs to document whether RhoGAM is indicated, and failure to obtain appropriate informed consent to prevent unwanted abortions, among other concerns. The FDA justified this action by referencing flawed studies with significantly undercounted complications. The details of these study deficiencies are examined in this paper.

Outcome Analysis of Termination of Pregnancy in Second Trimester.

Background Second-trimester abortions, constitute 10-15% of global annual abortions, leading to two-thirds of major abortion-related complications. Recognizing the elevated risk, the WHO recommends diverse methods for safe termination. Surgical and medical approaches, particularly using drugs like Mifepristone and Misoprostol, show promising success rates. Objective To analyze the outcomes of second-trimester termination using Mifepristone or PG analogues alone or in combination. Method This is a one-year retrospective study at Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital analyzing second-trimester terminations, collecting data on demographics, medical history, period of gestation, doses of abotificient drugs, complications, and management. Result In a study of 66 second-trimester abortions, mean age was 28.8±4.96 years, gestational age 20.07±4.3 weeks. Mifepristone and Misoprostol combination succeeded in 66.7% of cases, while 42.2% required repeated Mifepristone doses. Misoprostol use was significantly higher in patients without medical comorbidities (p=0.018), but Mifepristone requirement didn't differ significantly based on medical conditions. Combined Mifepristone and Misoprostol were used more for fetal indications. Notably, the use of Mifepristone and Misoprostol didn't significantly differ for live and intrauterine fetal death cases. Conclusion Mifepristone and Misoprostol effectively terminate second-trimester pregnancies. In high-risk cases, cautious Prostaglandin use is crucial and Mifepristone alone, in divided doses, reduces complications with high success.

Mifepristone Pretreatment for the Medical Management of Early Pregnancy Loss.

BACKGROUND: Medical management of early pregnancy loss is an alternative to uterine aspiration, but standard medical treatment with misoprostol commonly results in treatment failure. We compared the efficacy and safety of pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol with the efficacy and safety of misoprostol use alone for the management of early pregnancy loss. METHODS: We randomly assigned 300 women who had an anembryonic gestation or in whom embryonic or fetal death was confirmed to receive pretreatment with 200 mg of mifepristone, administered orally, followed by 800 µg of misoprostol, administered vaginally (mifepristone-pretreatment group), or 800 µg of misoprostol alone, administered vaginally (misoprostol-alone group). Participants returned 1 to 4 days after misoprostol use for evaluation, including ultrasound examination, by an investigator who was unaware of the treatment-group assignments. Women in whom the gestational sac was not expelled were offered expectant management, a second dose of misoprostol, or uterine aspiration. We followed all participants for 30 days after randomization. Our primary outcome was gestational sac expulsion with one dose of misoprostol by the first follow-up visit and no additional intervention within 30 days after treatment. RESULTS: Complete expulsion after one dose of misoprostol occurred in 124 of 148 women (83.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 76.8 to 89.3) in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 100 of 149 women (67.1%; 95% CI, 59.0 to 74.6) in the misoprostol-alone group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.43). Uterine aspiration was performed less frequently in the mifepristone-pretreatment group than in the misoprostol-alone group (8.8% vs. 23.5%; relative risk, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.68). Bleeding that resulted in blood transfusion occurred in 2.0% of the women in the mifepristone-pretreatment group and in 0.7% of the women in the misoprostol-alone group (P=0.31); pelvic infection was diagnosed in 1.3% of the women in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with mifepristone followed by treatment with misoprostol resulted in a higher likelihood of successful management of first-trimester pregnancy loss than treatment with misoprostol alone. (Funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; PreFaiR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02012491 .).

Cost-effectiveness of mifepristone and misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for the management of missed miscarriage: an economic evaluation based on the MifeMiso trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of mifepristone and misoprostol (MifeMiso) compared with misoprostol only for the medical management of a missed miscarriage. DESIGN: Within-trial economic evaluation and model-based analysis to set the findings in the context of the wider economic evidence for a range of comparators. Incremental costs and outcomes were calculated using nonparametric bootstrapping and reported using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Analyses were performed from the perspective of the UK's National Health Service (NHS). SETTING: Twenty-eight UK NHS early pregnancy units. SAMPLE: A cohort of 711 women aged 16-39 years with ultrasound evidence of a missed miscarriage. METHODS: Treatment with mifepristone and misoprostol or with matched placebo and misoprostol tablets. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost per additional successfully managed miscarriage and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: For the within-trial analysis, MifeMiso intervention resulted in an absolute effect difference of 6.6% (95% CI 0.7-12.5%) per successfully managed miscarriage and a QALYs difference of 0.04% (95% CI -0.01 to 0.1%). The average cost per successfully managed miscarriage was lower in the MifeMiso arm than in the placebo and misoprostol arm, with a cost saving of £182 (95% CI £26-£338). Hence, the MifeMiso intervention dominated the use of misoprostol alone. The model-based analysis showed that the MifeMiso intervention is preferable, compared with expectant management, and this is the current medical management strategy. However, the model-based evidence suggests that the intervention is a less effective but less costly strategy than surgical management. CONCLUSIONS: The within-trial analysis found that based on cost-effectiveness grounds, the MifeMiso intervention is likely to be recommended by decision makers for the medical management of women presenting with a missed miscarriage. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: The combination of mifepristone and misoprostol is more effective and less costly than misoprostol alone for the management of missed miscarriages.

Women's experiences of a telemedicine abortion service (up to 12 weeks) implemented during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic: a qualitative evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the experiences of women in Scotland who accessed medical abortion at home up to 12 weeks' gestation, delivered via a telemedicine abortion service implemented in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, to identify areas for improvement and inform service provision. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study. SETTING: Abortion service in one National Health Service health board in Scotland. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Twenty women who accessed telemedicine abortion services and self-administered mifepristone and misoprostol at home up to 12 weeks' gestation. METHODS: Thematic analysis of semi-structured qualitative interviews, informed by the Framework analytic approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Women's experiences of accessing telemedicine for medical abortion at home, specifically: acceptability of the telephone consultation and remote support; views on no pre-abortion ultrasound scan; and self-administration of abortion medications at home. RESULTS: Novel study findings were three-fold: (1) participants valued the option of accessing abortion care via telemedicine and emphasised the benefits of providing a choice of telephone and in-person consultation to suit those with different life circumstances; (2) the quality of abortion care was enhanced by the telemedicine service in relation to access, comfort and flexibility, and ongoing telephone support; (3) participants described being comfortable with, and in some cases a preference for, not having an ultrasound scan. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates support for the continuation of telemedicine abortion services beyond the temporary arrangements in place during COVID-19, and lends weight to the argument that offering the option of telemedicine abortion care can enable women to access this essential health service. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: #Telemedicine provision of medical #abortion at home up to 12 weeks' gestation is acceptable and highly valued by #women #Research #SRHR @nbw80 @doctorjjrw @jeniharden @cameronsharon @mrc_crh @edinuniusher.

Methods for managing miscarriage: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their lifetime. An estimated 15% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Miscarriage can lead to serious morbidity, including haemorrhage, infection, and even death, particularly in settings without adequate healthcare provision. Early miscarriages occur during the first 14 weeks of pregnancy, and can be managed expectantly, medically or surgically. However, there is uncertainty about the relative effectiveness and risks of each option. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the relative effectiveness and safety profiles for the different management methods for early miscarriage, and to provide rankings of the available methods according to their effectiveness, safety, and side-effect profile using a network meta-analysis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (9 February 2021), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (12 February 2021), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness or safety of methods for miscarriage management. Early miscarriage was defined as less than or equal to 14 weeks of gestation, and included missed and incomplete miscarriage. Management of late miscarriages after 14 weeks of gestation (often referred to as intrauterine fetal deaths) was not eligible for inclusion in the review. Cluster- and quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved. We excluded non-randomised trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least three review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for the primary outcomes of complete miscarriage and composite outcome of death or serious complications. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Relative effects for the primary outcomes are reported subgrouped by the type of miscarriage (incomplete and missed miscarriage). We also performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available methods. MAIN RESULTS: Our network meta-analysis included 78 randomised trials involving 17,795 women from 37 countries. Most trials (71/78) were conducted in hospital settings and included women with missed or incomplete miscarriage. Across 158 trial arms, the following methods were used: 51 trial arms (33%) used misoprostol; 50 (32%) used suction aspiration; 26 (16%) used expectant management or placebo; 17 (11%) used dilatation and curettage; 11 (6%) used mifepristone plus misoprostol; and three (2%) used suction aspiration plus cervical preparation. Of these 78 studies, 71 (90%) contributed data in a usable form for meta-analysis. Complete miscarriage Based on the relative effects from the network meta-analysis of 59 trials (12,591 women), we found that five methods may be more effective than expectant management or placebo for achieving a complete miscarriage: · suction aspiration after cervical preparation (risk ratio (RR) 2.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.41 to 3.20, low-certainty evidence), · dilatation and curettage (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.75, low-certainty evidence), · suction aspiration (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.62, low-certainty evidence), · mifepristone plus misoprostol (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66, moderate-certainty evidence), · misoprostol (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.46, low-certainty evidence). The highest ranked surgical method was suction aspiration after cervical preparation. The highest ranked non-surgical treatment was mifepristone plus misoprostol. All surgical methods were ranked higher than medical methods, which in turn ranked above expectant management or placebo. Composite outcome of death and serious complications Based on the relative effects from the network meta-analysis of 35 trials (8161 women), we found that four methods with available data were compatible with a wide range of treatment effects compared with expectant management or placebo: · dilatation and curettage (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.06, low-certainty evidence), · suction aspiration (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.32, low-certainty evidence), · misoprostol (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.15, low-certainty evidence), · mifepristone plus misoprostol (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.84, low-certainty evidence). Importantly, no deaths were reported in these studies, thus this composite outcome was entirely composed of serious complications, including blood transfusions, uterine perforations, hysterectomies, and intensive care unit admissions. Expectant management and placebo ranked the lowest when compared with alternative treatment interventions. Subgroup analyses by type of miscarriage (missed or incomplete) agreed with the overall analysis in that surgical methods were the most effective treatment, followed by medical methods and then expectant management or placebo, but there are possible subgroup differences in the effectiveness of the available methods.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on relative effects from the network meta-analysis, all surgical and medical methods for managing a miscarriage may be more effective than expectant management or placebo. Surgical methods were ranked highest for managing a miscarriage, followed by medical methods, which in turn ranked above expectant management or placebo. Expectant management or placebo had the highest chance of serious complications, including the need for unplanned or emergency surgery. A subgroup analysis showed that surgical and medical methods may be more beneficial in women with missed miscarriage compared to women with incomplete miscarriage. Since type of miscarriage (missed and incomplete) appears to be a source of inconsistency and heterogeneity within these data, we acknowledge that the main network meta-analysis may be unreliable. However, we plan to explore this further in future updates and consider the primary analysis as separate networks for missed and incomplete miscarriage.

Expulsion at home for early medical abortion: A systematic review with meta-analyses.

INTRODUCTION: The safety and acceptability of medical abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol at home at ≤9+0  weeks' gestation is well established. However, the upper gestational limit at which the procedure remains safe and acceptable at home is not known. To inform a national guideline on abortion care we conducted a systematic review to determine what gestational limit for expulsion at home offers the best balance of benefits and harms for women who are having medical abortion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cinahl Plus and Web-of-Science on 2 January 2020 for prospective and retrospective cohort studies with ≥50 women per gestational age group, published in English from 1995 onwards, that included women undergoing medical abortion and compared home expulsion of pregnancies of ≤9+0  weeks' gestational age with pregnancies of 9+1 -10+0  weeks or >10+1  weeks' gestational age, or compared the latter two gestational age groups. We assessed risk-of-bias using the Newcastle-Ottowa scale. All outcomes were meta-analyzed as risk ratios (RR) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Six studies (n = 3381) were included. The "need for emergency care/admission to hospital" (RR = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.4), "hemorrhage requiring transfusion/≥500 mL blood loss" (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.11-3.55), patient satisfaction (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03), pain (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.82-1.02), and "complete abortion without the need for surgical intervention" (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 1-1.05) did not differ statistically significantly between the ≤9+0 and >9+0  weeks' gestation groups. The rates of vomiting (RR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.69-0.93) and diarrhea (RR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99) were statistically significantly lower in the ≤9+0  weeks group but these differences were not considered clinically important. We found no studies comparing pregnancies of 9+1 -10+0  weeks' gestation with pregnancies of >10+0  weeks' gestation. The certainty of this evidence was predominantly low and mainly compromised by low event rates and loss to follow up. CONCLUSIONS: Women who are having a medical abortion and will be taking mifepristone up to and including 10+0  weeks' gestation should be offered the option of expulsion at home after they have taken the misoprostol. Further research needs to determine whether the gestational limit for home expulsion can be extended beyond 10+0  weeks.

Effects of RU486 treatment after single prolonged stress depend on the post-stress interval.

The Single Prolonged Stress protocol is considered a model for PTSD, as it induces long lasting changes in rat behaviour and endocrine regulation. Previous work demonstrated that some of these changes can be prevented by treatment with the glucocorticoid receptor antagonist RU486, administered a week after the stressor. The current study evaluated the effects of an earlier intervention with RU486, as evaluated 1 week after SPS-exposure. Most RU486 effects occurred independent of prior stress, except for the reversal of a stress-induced increase in locomotor behaviour. The accompanying changes in gene expression depended on gene, brain region, and time. DNA methylation of the robustly down-regulated Fkbp5 gene was dissociated of changes in mRNA expression. The findings reinforce the long term effects of GR antagonist treatment, but also emphasize the need to evaluate changes over time to allow the identification of robust correlates between gene expression and behavioural/endocrine outcome of stressful experiences.

Mifepristone and Misoprostol for Early Pregnancy Loss and Medication Abortion.

Medication regimens using mifepristone and misoprostol are safe and effective for outpatient treatment of early pregnancy loss for up to 84 days' gestation and for medication abortion up to 77 days' gestation. Gestational age is determined using ultrasonography or menstrual history. Ultrasonography is needed when gestational dating cannot be confirmed using clinical data alone or when there are risk factors for ectopic pregnancy. The most effective regimens for medication management of early pregnancy loss and medication abortion include 200 mg of oral mifepristone (a progesterone receptor antagonist) followed by 800 mcg of misoprostol (a prostaglandin E1 analogue) administered buccally or vaginally. Cramping and bleeding are expected effects of the medications, with bleeding lasting an average of nine to 16 days. The adverse effects of misoprostol (e.g., low-grade fever, gastrointestinal symptoms) can be managed with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or antiemetics. Ongoing pregnancy, infection, hemorrhage, undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy, and the need for unplanned uterine aspiration are rare complications. Clinical history, combined with serial quantitative beta human chorionic gonadotropin levels, urine pregnancy testing, or ultrasonography, is used to establish complete passage of the pregnancy tissue.

Second trimester medical abortion in a primigravida with lupus nephritis and rapidly progressive renal failure: challenges and outcome.

In the second trimester, medical abortion is preferred as it is less invasive, and the surgical method carries more risk. There is a paucity of published literature on medical abortion in women with renal failure requiring haemodialysis. We came across a woman who presented with rapidly progressive renal failure at 18 weeks of gestation and required therapeutic abortion. We are reporting the challenges, outcomes, and precautions to be taken while performing a medical abortion in such a case.

Inhibition of expression of glucocorticoids receptors may contribute to postpartum depression.

Although postpartum depression (PPD) is the leading cause of disability worldwide, its molecular mechanisms are poorly understood. Recent evidence has suggested that impaired glucocorticoid receptor (GR), the signaling of key molecules of the HPA axis, plays a key role in the behavioral and neuroendorcrine alterations of major depression. However, the role of GR in postpartum period, which following with the abrupt withdrawal of placental corticotropin releasing hormone (CRH) and resulting in a re-equilibration of the maternal HPA axis in the days of post-delivery, is still not entirely clear. Previously, a hormone-simulated pregnancy (HSP), and the subsequent 'postpartum' withdrawal in estrogen has been employed to mimic the fluctuations in estradiol associated with pregnancy and postpartum. Using the HSP model, we investigated here the effect of 'postpartum' withdrawal in estrogen as well as depression- and anxiety-like behavior by intra-hippocampal infusion with GR inhibitor-RU486. Following the successful acquisition of PPD model by withdrawal in estrogen, reduced GR expression was observed in hippocampus. Further, HSP-rats suffered intra-hippocampal RU486 infusion presented depression- and anxiety-like behavior as postpartum depression. Together, these results suggest an important, though complex, role for GR in the behavioral regulation of postpartum depression.

Self-administered versus provider-administered medical abortion.

BACKGROUND: The advent of medical abortion has improved access to safe abortion procedures. Medical abortion procedures involve either administering mifepristone followed by misoprostol or a misoprostol-only regimen. The drugs are commonly administered in the presence of clinicians, which is known as provider-administered medical abortion. In self-administered medical abortion, drugs are administered by the woman herself without the supervision of a healthcare provider during at least one stage of the drug protocol. Self-administration of medical abortion has the potential to provide women with control over the abortion process. In settings where there is a shortage of healthcare providers, self-administration may reduce the burden on the health system. However, it remains unclear whether self-administration of medical abortion is effective and safe. It is important to understand whether women can safely and effectively terminate their own pregnancies when having access to accurate and adequate information, high-quality drugs, and facility-based care in case of complications. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of self-administered versus provider-administered medical abortion in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE in process and other non-indexed citations, Embase, CINAHL, POPLINE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and Google Scholar from inception to 10 July 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies with a concurrent comparison group, using study designs that compared medical abortion by self-administered versus provider-administered methods. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted the data, and we performed a meta-analysis where appropriate using Review Manager 5. Our primary outcome was successful abortion (effectiveness), defined as complete uterine evacuation without the need for surgical intervention. Ongoing pregnancy (the presence of an intact gestational sac) was our secondary outcome measuring success or effectiveness. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with Chi2 tests and I2 statistics using a cut-off point of P < 0.10 to indicate statistical heterogeneity. Quality assessment of the data used the GRADE approach. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 18 studies (two RCTs and 16 non-randomized studies (NRSs)) comprising 11,043 women undergoing early medical abortion (≤ 9 weeks gestation) in 10 countries. Sixteen studies took place in low-to-middle income resource settings and two studies were in high-resource settings. One NRS study received analgesics from a pharmaceutical company. Five NRSs and one RCT did not report on funding; nine NRSs received all or partial funding from an anonymous donor. Five NRSs and one RCT received funding from government agencies, private foundations, or non-profit bodies. The intervention in the evidence is predominantly from women taking mifepristone in the presence of a healthcare provider, and subsequently taking misoprostol without healthcare provider supervision (e.g. at home). There is no evidence of a difference in rates of successful abortions between self-administered and provider-administered groups: for two RCTs, risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.01; 919 participants; moderate certainty of evidence. There is very low certainty of evidence from 16 NRSs: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01; 10,124 participants. For the outcome of ongoing pregnancy there may be little or no difference between the two groups: for one RCT: RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.41 to 7.02; 735 participants; low certainty of evidence; and very low certainty evidence for 11 NRSs: RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.49; 6691 participants. We are uncertain whether there are any differences in complications requiring surgical intervention, since we found no RCTs and evidence from three NRSs was of very low certainty: for three NRSs: RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.80 to 5.71; 2452 participants. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that self-administering the second stage of early medical abortion procedures is as effective as provider-administered procedures for the outcome of abortion success. There may be no difference for the outcome of ongoing pregnancy, although the evidence for this is uncertain for this outcome. There is very low-certainty evidence for the risk of complications requiring surgical intervention. Data are limited by the scarcity of high-quality research study designs and the presence of risks of bias. This review provides insufficient evidence to determine the safety of self-administration when compared with administering medication in the presence of healthcare provider supervision. Future research should investigate the effectiveness and safety of self-administered medical abortion in the absence of healthcare provider supervision through the entirety of the medical abortion protocol (e.g. during administration of mifepristone or as part of a misoprostol-only regimen) and at later gestational ages (i.e. more than nine weeks). In the absence of any supervision from medical personnel, research is needed to understand how best to inform and support women who choose to self-administer, including when to seek clinical care.