Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Saxena, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sarda, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Saxena, P.
Right arrow Articles by Sarda, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 19, No. 1, 77-80, January 2004
© 2004 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Comparison between the sublingual and oral route of misoprostol for pre-abortion cervical priming in first trimester abortions

Pikee Saxena1,3, Sudha Salhan2 and Nivedita Sarda2

1 Department of Reproductive Biomedicine, National Institute of Health and Family Welfare and 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India

3 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Reproductive Biomedicine, National Institute of Health and Family Welfare, New Mehrauli Road, Munirka, New Delhi 110067, India. e-mail: pikeesaxena{at}hotmail.com

BACKGROUND: Misoprostol has been used for achieving cervical priming before suction evacuation (SE) by the oral or vaginal route, although both routes have their shortcomings. We evaluated the efficacy of the sublingual versus oral route of misoprostol for cervical priming before SE. METHODS: A prospective clinical trial was carried out in 100 women with a period of gestation of between 6 and 12 weeks who were sequentially allocated to two groups of 50 each. Both groups received 400 µg of misoprostol 3 h prior to SE by either the sublingual or the oral route. RESULTS: Demographically, both groups were similar. For all periods of gestation, sublingual misoprostol significantly improved cervical dilation (P < 0.001) with a reduction in duration of surgery (P = 0.024) compared with the oral route. Mean (±SD) pain scores for the sublingual and oral groups were similar (2.6 ± 1.4 versus 3.5 ± 1.1). No major complications occurred in either of the two groups. CONCLUSION: the sublingual route is an effective alternative to oral administration of misoprostol for cervical dilation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to compare the efficacy of the sublingual versus the oral route of misoprostol for cervical priming before SE.

Key words: cervical priming/misoprostol/oral/sublingual/suction evacuation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.