Fertility and obstetric outcomes after curettage versus expectant management in randomised and non-randomised women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage.

OBJECTIVE: To assess fertility and obstetric outcomes in women treated with curettage or undergoing expectant management for an incomplete miscarriage after misoprostol treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Between June 2012 and July 2014, we conducted a multicentre randomised clinical trial (RCT) with a parallel cohort study for non-randomised women, treated according to their preference. In the RCT 30 women were allocated curettage and 29 expectant management. In the cohort 197 women participated; 65 underwent curettage and 132 women underwent expectant management. Primary outcome was curation, defined as either an empty uterus on sonography at six weeks or an uneventful clinical follow-up. We used questionnaires to assess fertility and obstetric outcome of the first new pregnancy subsequent to study enrolment. RESULTS: Curation was seen in 91/95 women treated with curettage (95.8%) versus 134/161 women managed expectantly (83.2%) (p=0.003). The response rate was 211/255 (82%). In 198 women pursuing a new pregnancy, conception rates were 92% (67/73) in the curettage group versus 96% (120/125) in the expectant management group (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.89;1.03, p=0.34), with ongoing pregnancy rates of 87% (58/67) versus 78% (94/120), respectively (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.99;1.28, p=0.226). Preterm birth rates were 1/46 in the curettage group versus 8/81 in the expectant management group (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03;1.71 P=0.15). Caesarean section rates were 23% and 24% for women in the curettage group and expectant management group respectively. CONCLUSION: In women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment, curettage and expectant management does not lead to different fertility and pregnancy outcomes, as compared to expectant management.

MisoREST: surgical versus expectant management in women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for miscarriage: a randomized controlled trial.

STUDY QUESTION: Is curettage more effective than expectant management in case of an incomplete evacuation after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage? SUMMARY ANSWER: Curettage leads to a higher chance of complete evacuation but expectant management is successful in at least 76% of women with an incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol treatment for first trimester miscarriage. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: In 5-50% of the women treated with misoprostol, there is a suspicion of incomplete evacuation of the uterus on sonography. Although these women generally have minor symptoms, such a finding often leads to additional curettage. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: From June 2012 until July 2014, we conducted a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT). Women who had had primary misoprostol treatment for miscarriage with sonographic evidence of incomplete evacuation of the uterus were randomly allocated to either curettage or expectant management (1:1), using a web-based application. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We included 59 women in 27 hospitals; 30 were allocated to curettage and 29 were allocated to expectant management. A successful outcome was defined as sonographic finding of an empty uterus 6 weeks after randomization. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Baseline characteristics of both groups were comparable. Empty uterus on sonography or uneventful clinical follow-up was seen in 29/30 women (97%) allocated to curettage compared with 22/29 women (76%) allocated to expectant management (RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.03-1.6) with complication rates of 10% versus 10%, respectively (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.21-4.4). In the group allocated to curettage, no woman required re-curettage, while two women (6.7%) underwent hysteroscopy (for other or unknown reasons). In the women allocated to expectant management, curettage was performed in four women (13.8%) and three women (10.3%) underwent hysteroscopy. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Due to a strong patient preference, mainly for expectant management, the targeted sample size could not be included and the trial was stopped prematurely. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: In women suspected of incomplete evacuation of the uterus after misoprostol, curettage is more effective than expectant management. However, expectant management is equally safe and prevents curettage for most of the women. This finding could further restrain the use of curettage in the treatment of first trimester miscarriage. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development, project number 80-82310-97-12066. There were no conflicts of interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register NTR3310, http://www.trialregister.nl TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 27 February 2012. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 12 June 2012.

Dilatation and curettage increases the risk of subsequent preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

STUDY QUESTION: Could dilatation and curettage (D&C), used in the treatment of miscarriage and termination of pregnancy, increase the risk of subsequent preterm birth? SUMMARY ANSWER: A history of curettage in women is associated with an increased risk of preterm birth in a subsequent pregnancy compared with women without such history. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: D&C is one of the most frequently performed procedures in obstetrics and gynaecology. Apart from the acknowledged but relatively rare adverse effects, such as cervical tears, bleeding, infection, perforation of the uterus, bowel or bladder, or Asherman syndrome, D&C has been suggested to also lead to an increased risk of preterm birth in the subsequent pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: In the absence of randomized data, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: We searched OVID MEDLINE and OVID EMBASE form inception until 21 May 2014. We selected cohort and case-control studies comparing subsequent preterm birth in women who had a D&C for first trimester miscarriage or termination of pregnancy and a control group of women without a history of D&C. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: We included 21 studies reporting on 1 853 017 women. In women with a history of D&C compared with those with no such history, the odds ratio (OR) for preterm birth <37 weeks was 1.29 (95% CI 1.17; 1.42), while for very preterm birth the ORs were 1.69 (95% CI 1.20; 2.38) for <32 weeks and 1.68 (95% CI 1.47; 1.92) for <28 weeks. The risk remained increased when the control group was limited to women with a medically managed miscarriage or induced abortion (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10; 1.28). For women with a history of multiple D&Cs compared with those with no D&C, the OR for preterm birth (<37 weeks) was 1.74 (95% CI 1.10; 2.76). For spontaneous preterm birth, the OR was 1.44 (95% CI 1.22; 1.69) for a history of D&C compared with no such history. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: There were no randomized controlled trials comparing women with and without a history of D&C and subsequent preterm birth. As a consequence, confounding may be present since the included studies were either cohort or case-control studies, not all of which corrected the results for possible confounding factors. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This meta-analysis shows that D&C is associated with an increased risk of subsequent preterm birth. The increased risk in association with multiple D&Cs indicates a causal relationship. Despite the fact that confounding cannot be excluded, these data warrant caution in the use of D&C for miscarriage and termination of pregnancy, the more so since less invasive options are available. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This study was funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development, project number 80-82310-97-12066.