Cited by 126Reproductive Health and ContraceptionPregnancy and Medication ImpactReproductive System and Pregnancy

Randomised trial comparing expectant with medical management for first trimester miscarriages

Nielsen, Sven, Hahlin, Mats, Platz‐Christensen, Jens·1999·BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology

Abstract

Objective To compare the efficacy of antiprogesterone (mifepristone) in combination with a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analogue (misoprostol) for outpatient treatment of miscarriages. Participants One hundred and twenty-two women with first trimester miscarriages. Methods The women were randomised to treatment with mifepristone 400 mg orally followed by a single oral dose of 400 microg misoprostol 48 hours later (n = 60) or expectant management (n = 62). Women were re-evaluated five days later. If retained intrauterine products of conception were found with an antero-posterior diameter above 15 mm on transvaginal ultrasound, surgical evacuation was performed. Results Eighty-two percent of the women randomised to pharmacological treatment and 76% of those randomised to expectant management had an empty uterine cavity after five days. Convalescence time was 1.8 days longer for women randomised to pharmacological treatment. Pain, bleeding, complications, and satisfaction with the treatment did not differ between the groups. Conclusions Most cases of spontaneous incomplete miscarriage will become a complete miscarriage without intervention. This study shows that outpatient treatment with a combination of antiprogesterone and a prostaglandin E1 analogue did not increase the rate of complete miscarriage, compared with expectancy alone, by a clinical important degree.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08401.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nielsen, S., Hahlin, M., & Platz‐Christensen, J.
Affiliations
Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Nielsen, Sven
Venue
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1999-08
Volume
106
Issue
8
Pages
804-807
ISSN
  • 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-0328
  • 1471-0528
OpenAlex
W2084815884
Cited by
126
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
8.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy and Medication Impact
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
Keywords
first-trimester miscarriage, expectant management, mifepristone, misoprostol, antiprogesterone, prostaglandin E1 analogue, incomplete abortion, miscarriage, outpatient care, retained products of conception
MeSH terms
Abortifacient Agents, Steroidal, Abortion, Spontaneous, Adult, Ambulatory Care, Female, Chorionic Gonadotropin, Humans, Length of Stay, Pain, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Progesterone, Mifepristone, Placenta, Retained

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