Abortion Safety and Use with Normally Prescribed Mifepristone in Canada.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, mifepristone is available for medical abortion (for use with misoprostol) only with Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) restrictions, despite an absence of evidence to support such restrictions. Mifepristone has been available in Canada with a normal prescription since November 2017. METHODS: Using population-based administrative data from Ontario, Canada, we examined abortion use, safety, and effectiveness using an interrupted time-series analysis comparing trends in incidence before mifepristone was available (January 2012 through December 2016) with trends after its availability without restrictions (November 7, 2017, through March 15, 2020). RESULTS: A total of 195,183 abortions were performed before mifepristone was available and 84,032 after its availability without restrictions. After the availability of mifepristone with a normal prescription, the abortion rate continued to decline, although more slowly than was expected on the basis of trends before mifepristone had been available (adjusted risk difference in time-series analysis, 1.2 per 1000 female residents between 15 and 49 years of age; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 1.4), whereas the percentage of abortions provided as medical procedures increased from 2.2% to 31.4% (adjusted risk difference, 28.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 28.0 to 29.7). There were no material changes between the period before mifepristone was available and the nonrestricted period in the incidence of severe adverse events (0.03% vs. 0.04%; adjusted risk difference, 0.01 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.03), complications (0.74% vs. 0.69%; adjusted risk difference, 0.06 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.18), or ectopic pregnancy detected after abortion (0.15% vs. 0.22%; adjusted risk difference, -0.03 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.09). There was a small increase in ongoing intrauterine pregnancy continuing to delivery (adjusted risk difference, 0.08 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: After mifepristone became available as a normal prescription, the abortion rate remained relatively stable, the proportion of abortions provided by medication increased rapidly, and adverse events and complications remained stable, as compared with the period when mifepristone was unavailable. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Women's Health Research Institute.).

Short-Term Adverse Outcomes After Mifepristone-Misoprostol Versus Procedural Induced Abortion : A Population-Based Propensity-Weighted Study.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies comparing first-trimester pharmaceutical induced abortion (IA) with procedural IA were prone to selection bias, were underpowered to assess serious adverse events (SAEs), and did not account for confounding by indication. Starting in 2017, mifepristone-misoprostol was dispensed at no cost in outpatient pharmacies across Ontario, Canada. OBJECTIVE: To compare short-term risk for adverse outcomes after early IA by mifepristone-misoprostol versus by procedural IA. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. PATIENTS: All women who had first-trimester IA. MEASUREMENTS: A total of 39 856 women dispensed mifepristone-misoprostol as outpatients were compared with 65 176 women undergoing procedural IA at 14 weeks' gestation or earlier within nonhospital outpatient clinics (comparison 1). A total of 39 856 women prescribed mifepristone-misoprostol were compared with 8861 women undergoing ambulatory hospital-based procedural IA at an estimated 9 weeks' gestation or less (comparison 2). The primary composite outcome was any SAE within 42 days after IA, including severe maternal morbidity, end-organ damage, intensive care unit admission, or death. A coprimary broader outcome comprised any SAE, hemorrhage, retained products of conception, infection, or transfusion. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting accounted for confounding between exposure groups. RESULTS: Mean age at IA was about 29 years (SD, 7); 33% were primigravidae. Six percent resided in rural areas, and 25% resided in low-income neighborhoods. In comparison 1, SAEs occurred among 133 women after mifepristone-misoprostol IA (3.3 per 1000) versus 114 after procedural IA (1.8 per 1000) (relative risk [RR], 1.87 [95% CI, 1.44 to 2.43]; absolute risk difference [ARD], 1.5 per 1000 [CI, 0.9 to 2.2]). The respective rates of any adverse event were 28.9 versus 12.4 per 1000 (RR, 2.33 [CI, 2.11 to 2.57]; ARD, 16.5 per 1000 [CI, 14.5 to 18.4]). In comparison 2, SAEs occurred among 133 (3.4 per 1000) and 27 (3.3 per 1000) women, respectively (RR, 1.04 [CI, 0.61 to 1.78]). The respective rates of any adverse event were 31.2 versus 24.9 per 1000 (RR, 1.25 [CI, 1.04 to 1.51]). LIMITATION: A woman prescribed mifepristone-misoprostol may not have taken the medication, and the exact gestational age at IA was not always known. CONCLUSION: Although rare, short-term adverse events are more likely after mifepristone-misoprostol IA than procedural IA, especially for less serious adverse outcomes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Progesterone after mifepristone: A pilot prospective single arm clinical trial for women who have changed their mind after commencing medical abortion.

AIM: This pilot study aimed to assess the utility of an oral progesterone treatment protocol for women who commenced medical abortion and then changed their mind and wished instead to maintain their pregnancy. METHODS: The Progesterone-After-Mifepristone-pilot for efficacy and reproducibility (PAMper) trial was designed as a prospective single-arm pilot clinical trial, conducted via telehealth. Women aged 18 to 45 years in Australia who reported ingesting mifepristone within the last 72 h to initiate medical abortion and had not taken misoprostol were included. Initial contact was by a web-based form. Following informed consent, participants were prescribed oral progesterone to be taken 400 mg twice per day for 3 days then 400 mg at night until completion of a 19 day course. Pregnancy viability was assessed by ultrasound scan after 14 days of progesterone treatment. RESULTS: Between October 2020 and June 2021, nine women contacted the PAMper trial, of whom six enrolled and commenced progesterone treatment. These women reported ingesting mifepristone at 40-70 days of gestation, with progesterone being commenced within 5.7-72 h of mifepristone ingestion. Five participants had ongoing, live pregnancies at the primary endpoint (ultrasound at >2 weeks). One participant had a miscarriage after 9 days of progesterone treatment. There were no clinically significant adverse events. CONCLUSION: This small study demonstrated a clinically sound protocol for researching the use of progesterone-after-mifepristone for women in this circumstance. Results of this pilot study support the need for further larger scale trials in this field.

Toxicities of herbal abortifacients.

BACKGROUND: In the post-Roe era, barriers to facility-based abortions may lead to an increased incidence of self-managed abortions. While misoprostol-based medication abortions have significant literature supporting its safety profile, there is a knowledge deficit within the medical community regarding the toxicities of commonly used herbal abortifacients. METHODS: This is a narrative review, based on a MEDLINE and HOLLIS database search, of self-managed abortion methods with herbal abortifacients and their associated toxicities. RESULTS: Common herbal abortifacients with significant morbidity and mortality implications include pennyroyal, blue cohosh, rue, and quinine. Other commonly reported abortifacients considered to be less toxic also are discussed in brief. Special considerations for hepatic, cardiac, renal, and hematologic toxicities are important in patients with significant exposures to these herbal substances. CONCLUSION: There is an anticipated increase in the utility of herbal xenobiotics for self-managed abortions with post-Roe restrictions to standard mifepristone-misoprostol protocols. Frontline providers should be aware of the associated toxicities and have special considerations when treating a poisoned patient in this population.

Randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy of a combination regime containing two cervical sensitizers (mifepristone + Foley's catheter) versus single agent mifepristone or Foley's catheter for labor induction in women attempting TOLAC at late third trimester with a dead fetus in utero.

Randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy of a combination regime containing two cervical sensitizers (mifepristone + Foley's catheter) versus single agent mifepristone or Foley's catheter for labor induction in women attempting TOLAC at late third trimester with a dead fetus in utero. AIM: To compare efficacy and safety of a new combination regime comprising of two cervical sensitizers used simultaneously with single agents, for labor induction in women attempting TOLAC at ≥34 weeks' gestation with a dead fetus. METHOD: This was a multiarm randomized controlled trial (RCT) where participants received one of the three regimes-single agent oral Mifepristone 200 mg, intracervical Foley's catheter (16 Fr size, filled with 40 mL normal saline after intracervical instillation), and combination regime consisting of both used simultaneously. Number of women undergoing vaginal birth within 48 h of induction (VB48 ) was the primary outcome compared between groups. RESULTS: VB48 was higher in participants on combination regime in comparison to participants on Foley's catheter (54 vs. 42). Total vaginal births were higher in participants on combination regime compared to both single agents (58 vs. 48 and 44). Duration and dose of oxytocin augmentation was lower in participants on combination regime compared to both single agents. Induction birth interval was short in participants on combination regime compared to those on Foley's catheter. Maternal complications between groups were similar. CONCLUSION: Combination of cervical sensitizers for labor induction in late third trimester among women with dead fetus attempting TOLAC resulted in higher proportion of vaginal births and might reduce risk of scar dehiscence due to requirement of a lower dose of oxytocin for augmentation.

Mifepristone: A Safe Method of Medical Abortion and Self-Managed Medical Abortion in the Post-Roe Era.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on June 24, 2022 effectively overturned federal constitutional protections for abortion that have existed since 1973 and returned jurisdiction to the states. Several states implemented abortion bans, some of which banned abortion after 6 weeks and others that permit abortion under limited exceptions, such as if the health or the life of the woman is in danger. Other states introduced bills that define life as beginning at fertilization. As a result of these new and proposed laws, the future availability of mifepristone, one of two drugs used for medical abortion in the United States, has become the topic of intense debate and speculation. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY: Although its safety and effectiveness has been confirmed by many studies, the use of mifepristone has been politicized regularly since its approval. Areas of future study include mifepristone for induction termination and fetal demise in the third trimester and the management of leiomyoma. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Society of Family Planning, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the World Health Organization. THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES: The use of no-touch medical abortion, which entails providing a medical abortion via a telehealth platform without a screening ultrasound or bloodwork, expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic, and studies have confirmed its safety. With the Dobbs decision, legal abortion will be less accessible and, consequently, self-managed abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol will become more prevalent. CONCLUSIONS: Mifepristone and misoprostol are extremely safe medications with many applications. In the current changing political climate, physicians and pregnancy-capable individuals must have access to these medications.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion.

BACKGROUND: Medical abortion became an alternative method of pregnancy termination following the development of prostaglandins and antiprogesterone in the 1970s and 1980s. Recently, synthesis inhibitors of oestrogen (such as letrozole) have also been used to enhance efficacy. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (such as misoprostol, which has a strong uterotonic effect), mifepristone, mifepristone with prostaglandins, and letrozole with prostaglandins. More evidence is needed to identify the best dosage, regimen, and route of administration to optimise patient outcomes. This is an update of a review last published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness and side effects of different medical methods for first trimester abortion. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and LILACs on 28 February 2021. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and reference lists of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different medical methods for abortion before the 12th week of gestation. The primary outcome is failure to achieve complete abortion. Secondary outcomes are mortality, surgical evacuation, ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus, blood transfusion, side effects and women's dissatisfaction with the method. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected and evaluated studies for inclusion, and assessed the risk of bias. We processed data using Review Manager 5 software. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 99 studies in the review (58 from the original review and 41 new studies). 1. Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin Mifepristone dose: high-dose (600 mg) compared to low-dose (200 mg) mifepristone probably has similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 3494 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin dose: 800 µg misoprostol probably reduces abortion failure compared to 400 µg (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.78; I2= 0%; 3 RCTs, 4424 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin timing: misoprostol administered on day one probably achieves more success on complete abortion than on day three (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.58; 1489 women; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence). Administration strategy: there may be no difference in failure of complete abortion with self-administration at home compared with hospital administration (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.94; I2 = 84%; 2263 women; 4 RCTs; low-certainty evidence), but failure may be higher when administered by nurses in hospital compared to by doctors in hospital (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.22; I2 = 66%; 3 RCTs, 3056 women; low-certainty evidence). Administration route: oral misoprostol probably leads to more failures than the vaginal route (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.87; I2 = 39%; 3 RCTs, 1704 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.26; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1380 women; low-certainty evidence) and diarrhoea (RR 1.80 95% CI 1.49 to 2.17; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1379 women). Compared with the vaginal route, complete abortion failure is probably lower with sublingual (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11; I2 = 59%; 2 RCTs, 3229 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be lower with buccal administration (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 479 women; low-certainty evidence), but sublingual or buccal routes may lead to more side effects. Women may experience more vomiting with sublingual compared to buccal administration (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.77; low-certainty evidence). 2. Mifepristone alone versus combined regimen The efficacy of mifepristone alone in achieving complete abortion compared to combined mifepristone/prostaglandin up to 12 weeks is unclear (RR of failure 3.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 13.09; I2 = 83%; 3 RCTs, 273 women; very low-certainty evidence). 3. Prostaglandin alone versus combined regimen Nineteen studies compared prostaglandin alone to a combined regimen (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate). Compared to any of the combination regimens, misoprostol alone may increase the risk for failure to achieve complete abortion (RR of failure 2.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 3.02; I2 = 64%; 18 RCTs, 3471 women; low-certainty evidence), and with more diarrhoea. 4. Prostaglandin alone (route of administration) Oral misoprostol alone may lead to more failures in complete abortion than the vaginal route (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.56 to 8.71, 2 RCTs, 216 women; low-certainty evidence). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be slightly reduced with sublingual compared with vaginal (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.28; I2 = 87%; 5 RCTs, 2705 women; low-certainty evidence) and oral administration (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.99; I2 = 66%; 2 RCTs, 173 women). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be similar or slightly higher with sublingual administration compared to buccal administration (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.74; 1 study, 401 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate) may be more effective than single agents (prostaglandin alone or mifepristone alone). In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can probably be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing effectiveness. Vaginal misoprostol is probably more effective than oral administration, and may have fewer side effects than sublingual or buccal. Some results are limited by the small numbers of participants on which they are based. Almost all studies were conducted in settings with good access to emergency services, which may limit the generalisability of these results.

Pain management for medical abortion before 14 weeks' gestation.

BACKGROUND: Abortion is common worldwide and increasingly abortions are performed at less than 14 weeks' gestation using medical methods, specifically using a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol. Medical abortion is known to be a painful process, but the optimal method of pain management is unclear. We sought to identify and compare pain management regimens for medical abortion before 14 weeks' gestation.  OBJECTIVES: Primary objective To determine if there is evidence of superiority of any particular pain relief regimen in the management of combination medical abortion (mifepristone + misoprostol) under 14 weeks' gestation (i.e. up to 13 + 6 weeks or 97 days). Secondary objectives To compare the rate of gastrointestinal side effects resulting from different methods of analgesia To compare the rate of complete abortion resulting from different methods of analgesia during medical abortion To determine if the induction-to-abortion interval is associated with different methods of analgesia To determine if any method of analgesia is associated with unscheduled contact with the care provider in relation to pain. SEARCH METHODS: On 21 August 2019 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACs, PsycINFO, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry and ClinicalTrials.gov together with reference checking and handsearching of conference abstracts of relevant learned societies and professional organisations to identify further studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs)) of any pain relief intervention (pharmacological and non-pharmacological) for mifepristone-misoprostol combination medical abortion of pregnancies less than 14 weeks' gestation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (JRW and MA) independently assessed all identified papers for inclusion and risks of bias, resolving any discrepancies through discussion with a third and fourth author as required (CM and SC). Two review authors independently conducted data extraction, including calculations of pain relief scores, and checked for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included four RCTs and one NRSI. Due to the heterogeneity of study designs, interventions and outcome reporting, we were unable to perform meta-analysis for any of the primary or secondary outcomes in this review. Only one study found evidence of an effect between interventions on pain score: a prophylactic dose of ibuprofen 1600 mg likely reduces the pain score when compared to a dose of paracetamol 2000 mg (mean difference (MD) 2.26 out of 10 lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.00 to 1.52 lower; 1 RCT 108 women; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in pain score when comparing pregabalin 300 mg with placebo (MD 0.5 out of 10 lower, 95% CI 1.41 lower to 0.41 higher; 1 RCT, 107 women; low-certainty evidence).  There may be little to no difference in pain score when comparing ibuprofen 800 mg with placebo (MD 1.4 out of 10 lower, 95% CI 3.33 lower to 0.53 higher; 1 RCT, 61 women; low-certainty evidence). Ambulation or non-ambulation during medical abortion treatment may have little to no effect on pain score, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD 0.1 out of 5 higher, 95% CI 0.26 lower to 0.46 higher; 1 NRSI, 130 women; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in pain score when comparing therapeutic versus prophylactic administration of ibuprofen 800 mg (MD 0.2 out of 10 higher, 95% CI 0.41 lower to 0.81 higher; 1 RCT, 228 women; low-certainty evidence).   Other outcomes of interest were reported inconsistently across studies. Where these outcomes were reported, there was no evidence of difference in incidence of gastrointestinal side effects, complete abortion rate, interval between misoprostol administration to pregnancy expulsion, unscheduled contact with a care provider, patient satisfaction with analgesia regimen nor patient satisfaction with abortion experience overall. However, the certainty of evidence was very low to low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review provide some support for the use of ibuprofen as a single dose given with misoprostol prophylactically, or in response to pain as needed. The optimal dosing of ibuprofen is unclear, but a single dose of ibuprofen 1600 mg was shown to be effective, and it was less certain whether 800 mg was effective. Paracetamol 2000 mg does not improve pain scores as much as ibuprofen 1600 mg, however its use does not appear to cause greater frequency of side effects or reduce the success of the abortion. A single dose of pregabalin 300 mg does not affect pain scores during medical abortion, but like paracetamol, does not appear to cause harm. Ambulation or non-ambulation during the medical abortion procedure does not appear to affect pain scores, outcomes, or duration of treatment and so women can be advised to mobilise or not, as they wish. The majority of outcomes in this review had low- to very low-certainty evidence, primarily due to small sample sizes and two studies at high risk of bias. High-quality, large-scale RCT research is needed for pain management during medical abortion at gestations less than 14 weeks. Consistent recording of pain with a validated measure would be of value to the field going forward.

Mifepristone combined with ethacridine lactate for third-trimester stillbirth induction: a 5-year experience from Shanghai.

OBJECTIVE: To review and analyze the efficacy and safety of mifepristone combined with ethacridine lactate for induction of stillbirth in the third trimester. METHODS: All patients with stillbirth in late pregnancy (≥ 28 weeks) in a university-affiliated maternity center from October 2016 to September 2021 were included in this study. After exclusion, patients were divided into ethacridine lactate and non-ethacridine lactate groups according to induction methods. Logistic regression was conducted to identify the risks of complications. RESULTS: We identified 122 patients that experienced stillbirth (5' Apgar score = 0) in third-trimester from the 5-year total deliveries in the hospital, among whom 39 stillbirths that resulted from termination of pregnancy for severe fetal anomalies and 1 stillbirth that was in twin pregnancy were excluded. Thus, 82 cases with stillbirths (dead before induction) were included in the analyses. In the 82 cases, 49 (59.76%) accepted intra-amniotic ethacridine lactate induction with 47 (95.92%, 47/49) successfully induced. No statistical difference was observed in induction failure rate between ethacridine dosage groups of < 75mg and ≥ 75mg (0/25, vs. 2/24, respectively; P > 0.05). The ethacridine lactate induction group showed no increased risks in complications (6.12%, 3/49), compared with non-ethacridine lactate group (12.12%, 4/33) (P = 0.35, OR, 0.47, 95%CI, 0.10 to 2.27). CONCLUSION: Mifepristone combined with ethacridine lactate is a safe and low-risk induction method for patients with stillbirth in the third trimester.

Toxicity of abortifacients: A review for physicians in the post roe era.

BACKGROUND: On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which will limit legal abortion in many areas of the U.S. Over half of abortions in the U.S. are performed using medication as opposed to surgical techniques. With widespread access to agents that are used for medication abortion, there may be an increase in emergency department presentations related to improper or unsupervised use of these medications. METHODS: This narrative review focuses on the contraindications, adverse effects, and toxicities of the most common agents used for medication abortion in the U.S. RESULTS: Medications included in this review are mifepristone, misoprostol, and methotrexate. Each of these medications has a unique adverse effect and toxicity profile. CONCLUSION: Agents used for medication abortion have unique contraindications and adverse effects. Improper or unsupervised use may occur in the setting of limited abortion access and emergency medicine physicians are on the front lines in managing these presentations.

Two cases of infantile-onset primary generalized glucocorticoid hypersensitivity and the effect of mifepristone.

BACKGROUND: Primary generalized glucocorticoid hypersensitivity (PGGH) is a very rare disease caused by terminal organ hypersensitivity to glucocorticoids for which the aetiology is unknown. The incidence of PGGH is extremely rare, especially in children. To date, the literatures about the etiology, prognosis and treatment of PGGH are scarce. Aim of the study is describing the cases of two Chinese children with infantile-onset PGGH in one family, one of whom died and one who was treated with mifepristone. They are the two youngest children with PGGH reported in the literature. CASE PRESENTATION: Two siblings with infantile-onset PGGH were affected in this family. The main manifestations of patient 1 were typical Cushing's syndrome-like manifestations, significantly aggravated symptoms after physiological doses of glucocorticoids and very low levels of serum cortisol and adrenocorticotropin hormone (ACTH) during attacks. After being diagnosed with PGGH, he was given guidance to avoid glucocorticoids and took mifepristone therapy for 5 months, and his symptoms improved. Patient 2 was the younger brother of patient 1, with similar manifestations to his brother at the age of 4 months. Patient 2 ultimately died at the age of 9 months. CONCLUSION: PGGH is a very rare disease that can lead to death if not diagnosed and treated in a timely manner. This article describes the cases of the two youngest children with PGGH reported in the literature, one of whom improved after mifepristone treatment, and increases the knowledge of the clinical manifestations of and the treatment experience in PGGH.

Bleeding pattern after medical management of early pregnancy loss with mifepristone-misoprostol and its prognostic value: a prospective observational cohort study.

PURPOSE: To improve counseling of women by reporting bleeding characteristics at home after medical management of an early pregnancy loss (EPL) with mifepristone and misoprostol, and to evaluate occurring bleeding patterns as a prognostic tool. METHODS: This prospective two-center observational cohort study enrolled 197 women who presented with an EPL (embryonic or anembryonic miscarriage) from December 2017 to April 2019 and chose a home-based medical management with 200 mg mifepristone and 800 mcg misoprostol. From the day of mifepristone intake, the strength of vaginal bleeding was recorded daily for 2 weeks by the patient herself using a diary sheet. Treatment success was defined as no histologically confirmed retained products of conception (RPOC) within 3 months. After considering all drop-out criteria, 154 women were included in the analysis. RESULTS: 40.0% of patients (95% CI 30.4-49.6) already reported bleeding onset in the time period between the intake of mifepristone and misoprostol. The median duration of vaginal bleeding including spotting was 13 days. The chance of RPOC was about sixfold (OR 6.06, 95% CI 2.15-17.10) in the group of persistent bleeding after 2 weeks compared to the group with a terminated bleeding at that time. Exploratory regression analysis indicated association of higher serum levels of leukocytes at treatment start with RPOC (p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Terminated bleeding after 2 weeks is a useful indicator for successful medical induction of EPL. Women undergoing medical treatment with mifepristone must be informed about the high frequency of bleeding onset before misoprostol intake. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS-German Clinical Trials Register, ID: DRKS00013515, registration date 05.12.2017. http://www.drks.de/DRKS00013515 .

Efficacy of mifepristone plus Shenqi Yangxue Granulesfor hysteromyoma complicated with anemia and its effect on hemoglobin, erythrocytes and hematocrit.

To assess the clinical efficacy of mifepristone complicated with anemia and its effect on the hemoglobin, red blood cell, as well as hematocrit. Sixty patients with hysteromyoma complicated with anemia between December 2018 and December 2020 were recruited and assigned to receive either mifepristone (control group, n=30) or mifepristone plus Shenqi Yangxue Granules (experimental group, n=30) based on the admission order. The two groups were compared in clinical efficiency, incidence of adverse reactions, myoma volume, uterine volume, and clinical indicators. The experimental group got a notably higher total treatment efficiency than the control group (P<0.05). The experimental group obtained a remarkably lower incidence of adverse reactions and smaller myoma volume and uterine volume than the control group (P<0.05). Patients in the experimental group showed lower hemoglobin levels and higher hematocrit levels than the control group (P<0.05). Combined therapy of mifepristone plus Shenqi Yangxue Granules resulted in lower erythrocyte aggregation index, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, in patients in the study group than those receiving mifepristone alone in the control group (P<0.05). Mifepristone plus Shenqi Yangxue Granules for patients with hysteromyoma complicated with anemia mitigates the clinical symptoms of patients and reduces the incidence of adverse reactions, with a high safety profile.

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 .).

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.

Deaths and Severe Adverse Events after the use of Mifepristone as an Abortifacient from September 2000 to February 2019.

OBJECTIVES: Primary: Analyze the Adverse Events (AEs) reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) after use of mifepristone as an abortifacient. Secondary: Analyze maternal intent after ongoing pregnancy and investigate hemorrhage after mifepristone alone. METHODS: Adverse Event Reports (AERs) for mifepristone used as an abortifacient, submitted to the FDA from September 2000 to February 2019, were analyzed using the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAEv3). RESULTS: The FDA provided 6158 pages of AERs. Duplicates, non-US, or AERs previously published (Gary, 2006) were excluded. Of the remaining, there were 3197 unique, US-only AERs of which there were 537 (16.80%) with insufficient information to determine clinical severity, leaving 2660 (83.20%) Codable US AERs. (Figure 1). Of these, 20 were Deaths, 529 were Life-threatening, 1957 were Severe, 151 were Moderate, and 3 were Mild.The deaths included: 9 (45.00%) sepsis, 4 (20.00%) drug toxicity/overdose, 1 (5.00%) ruptured ectopic pregnancy, 1 (5.00%) hemorrhage, 3 (15.00%) possible homicides, 1 (5.00%) suicide, 1 (5.00%) unknown. (Table 1).Retained products of conception and hemorrhage caused most morbidity. There were 75 ectopic pregnancies, including 26 ruptured ectopics (includes one death).There were 2243 surgeries including 2146 (95.68%) D&Cs of which only 853 (39.75%) were performed by abortion providers.Of 452 patients with ongoing pregnancies, 102 (22.57%) chose to keep their baby, 148 (32.74%) had terminations, 1 (0.22%) miscarried, and 201 (44.47%) had unknown outcomes.Hemorrhage occurred more often in those who took mifepristone and misoprostol (51.44%) than in those who took mifepristone alone (22.41%). CONCLUSIONS: Significant morbidity and mortality have occurred following the use of mifepristone as an abortifacient. A pre-abortion ultrasound should be required to rule out ectopic pregnancy and confirm gestational age. The FDA AER system is inadequate and significantly underestimates the adverse events from mifepristone.A mandatory registry of ongoing pregnancies is essential considering the number of ongoing pregnancies especially considering the known teratogenicity of misoprostol.The decision to prevent the FDA from enforcing REMS during the COVID-19 pandemic needs to be reversed and REMS must be strengthened.

Medication to Manage Abortion and Miscarriage.

Abortion and miscarriage are common, affecting millions of US women each year. By age 45, one in four women in the USA will have had an abortion, and at least as many will have had a miscarriage. Most individuals seeking abortion services do so before 10 weeks' gestation when medication abortions are a safe and effective option, using a regimen of oral mifepristone followed by misoprostol tablets. When a pregnancy is non-viable before 13 weeks' gestation, it is referred to as an early pregnancy loss or miscarriage and can be managed using the same mifepristone and misoprostol regimen. Given their safety and efficacy, mifepristone and misoprostol can be offered in ambulatory settings without special equipment or on-site emergency services. As more patients find it difficult to access clinical care when faced with an undesired pregnancy or a miscarriage, it is important for general internists and primary care providers to become familiar with how to use medications to manage these common conditions. We summarize the most recent evidence regarding the use of mifepristone with misoprostol for early abortion and miscarriage. We discuss clinical considerations and resources for integrating mifepristone and misoprostol into clinical practice. By learning to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol, clinicians can expand access to time-sensitive health services for vulnerable populations.

Systematic Review of the Effectiveness, Safety, and Acceptability of Mifepristone and Misoprostol for Medical Abortion in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

OBJECTIVE: Abortion-related complications remain one of the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Nearly half of all abortions are unsafe, and the vast majority of these occur in low- and middle-income countries. The use of mifepristone with misoprostol for medical abortion has been proposed and implemented to improve abortion safety. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL. STUDY SELECTION: Criteria for study inclusion were first-trimester abortion, use of mifepristone with misoprostol, and low- or middle-income country status as designated by the World Health Organization. DATA EXTRACTION: Results for effectiveness, safety, acceptability, and qualitative information were assessed. DATA SYNTHESIS: The literature search resulted in 181 eligible articles, 52 of which met our criteria for inclusion. A total of 34 publications reported effectiveness data on 25 385 medical abortions. The average effectiveness rate with mifepristone 200 mg and misoprostol 800 µg was 95% up to 63 days gestation. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assume that all women lost to follow-up failed treatment, and the recalculated effectiveness rate remained high at 93%. The average continuing pregnancy rate was 0.6%. A total of 22 publications reported safety and acceptability data on 17 381 medical abortions. Only 0.8% abortions required presentation to hospital, and 87% of patients found the side effects of treatment acceptable. Overall, 95% of women were satisfied with their medical abortion, 94% would choose the method again, and 94% would recommend this method to a friend. A total of 16 publications reported qualitative results and the majority supported positive patient experiences with medical abortion. CONCLUSIONS: Mifepristone and misoprostol is highly effective, safe, and acceptable to women in low- and middle-income countries, making it a feasible option for reducing maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide.

Management of pain associated with up-to-9-weeks medical termination of pregnancy (MToP) using mifepristone-misoprostol regimens: expert consensus based on a systematic literature review.

Evidence-based guidelines on the management of pain associated with first-trimester medical abortion are lacking. Most published clinical trials have failed to report on this important aspect of the procedure. The aim of this comprehensive work was to provide clinical advice based on a comprehensive literature review, supplemented by the clinical experience of a group of European experts in case no evidence is available. Pain level ranged from 5 to 8 in 80% of studies where pain was measured on a 0-10 visual analogue scale; severe pain was reported by 20-80% of women. Pain assessment was rarely reported in studies. Pain treatment should be preventive and avoidance of unnecessary uterine contractions should be considered. Analgesic treatment should follow the WHO three-step ladder, starting with the use of NSAIDs and allowing for easily available back-up treatment with weak opioids.