The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Vaginal misoprostol compared with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of vaginal with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy after pretreatment with mifepristone. METHODS: Women requesting termination of second-trimester pregnancy were randomized into two groups. Thirty-six to 48 hours after oral administration of 200 mg of mifepristone, women were given either oral or vaginal misoprostol 200 microg every 3 hours for a maximum of five doses in the first 24 hours. Women receiving oral misoprostol also were given a vaginal placebo (vitamin B6), whereas those receiving vaginal misoprostol were given an oral placebo. If they failed to abort, a second course was given by the same route. RESULTS: The median induction-abortion interval in the vaginal group (9 hours) was significantly shorter than that in the oral group (13 hours). The percentage of women aborting within 24 hours in the vaginal group (90%) was significantly higher than that in the oral group (69%). The median amount of misoprostol used in the vaginal group (600 microg) also was significantly less than that in the oral group (1000 microg). There was no significant difference in the incidence of side effects between the two groups except for fatigue and breast tenderness, which were more common in the oral group. Seventy-six percent of the women preferred the oral route, and 24.5% of the women preferred the vaginal route. CONCLUSION: Vaginal misoprostol is more effective than oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy after pretreatment with mifepristone, but more women preferred the oral route.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Pharmacokinetics of different routes of administration of misoprostol
Tang, O. S. (2002) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/17.2.332 · Cited by 490
Vaginal misoprostol as medical treatment for first trimester spontaneous miscarriage
Ngai, S. W. (2001) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/16.7.1493 · Cited by 105
Self-citationCervical dilation before first-trimester surgical abortion (< 14 weeks' gestation)
Allen, R. H., & Goldberg, A. B. (2016) · Contraception · doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2015.12.001 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- HO, P., NGAI, S., LIU, K., WONG, G., & LEE, S.
- Venue
- Obstetrics & Gynecology
- Published
- 1997-11
- Volume
- 90
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 735-738
- ISSN
- 0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2009004041
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Vaginal misoprostol compared with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00419-5
- The paper
- HO, P., NGAI, S., LIU, K., WONG, G., & LEE, S. (1997). Vaginal misoprostol compared with oral misoprostol in termination of second-trimester pregnancy. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0029-7844(97)00419-5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.