Elsevier

Contraception

Volume 76, Issue 2, August 2007, Pages 139-156
Contraception

Clinical Guidelines
Cervical dilation before first-trimester surgical abortion (<14 weeks' gestation)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2007.05.001Get rights and content

Abstract

First-trimester surgical abortion is a common, safe procedure with a major complication rate of less than 1%. Cervical dilation before suction aspiration is usually accomplished using tapered mechanical dilators. Risk factors for major complications in the first trimester are increasing gestational age and provider inexperience. Use of laminaria for cervical priming reduces the risk of cervical laceration and, to a lesser extent, uterine perforation. While pharmacological priming agents may potentially have the same effects, no published studies to date have been large enough to assess these outcomes. Given an experienced provider, the risk of these injuries during suction aspiration is very small.

Cervical priming can be achieved with osmotic dilators or pharmacological agents. The advantages of osmotic dilators such as laminaria, Dilapan-S™ and Lamicel® are their ability to produce wide cervical dilation, and for the synthetic types, their advantages include predictable effects and rapid onset of action. A disadvantage of osmotic dilators is that they require a speculum examination and a trained clinician to perform the insertion. When cervical priming is performed, misoprostol is the prostaglandin analogue most commonly used worldwide. Compared to laminaria, vaginal misoprostol requires a shorter period of time to achieve the same dilatation, is associated with less discomfort and is preferred by women. The sublingual route appears as effective as vaginal administration and requires less time for priming (2 h), but it is associated with more side effects. Oral administration can produce equivalent dilation to vaginal or sublingual administration, but higher doses and longer treatment periods (8 to 12 h) are required. Buccal administration of misoprostol appears to have a pharmacokinetic and physiologic profile similar to vaginal administration; however, there are no published studies of buccal misoprostol prior to first-trimester suction abortion.

While extensive data demonstrate that a variety of agents are safe and effective at causing cervical softening and dilation preoperatively, there are not enough data to conclude that routine cervical priming is necessary to reduce complications of first-trimester surgical abortion. Cervical priming increases preoperative cervical dilation, making the procedure easier and quicker for the physician. However, in order to preoperatively dilate the cervix, the woman must receive the agent at least 3 to 4 h prior to her procedure. Besides the additional waiting, the woman might experience bleeding and cramping prior to the procedure. There are insufficient data evaluating how cervical priming affects women's quality of life in relation to abortion. Based on existing evidence, the Society of Family Planning does not recommend routine cervical priming for suction aspiration procedures. The Society of Family Planning further recommends that providers consider cervical priming only for women who may be at increased risk of complications from cervical dilation, including those late in the first trimester, adolescents and women in whom cervical dilation is expected to be difficult due to either patient factors or provider experience.

Section snippets

Background

Induced abortion is one of the most common surgical procedures in the United States. In 2002, 1.3 million pregnancies were terminated, approximately 90% at less than 14 weeks' gestation [1]. First-trimester surgical abortion is a safe procedure with a mortality rate of 0.7 per 100,000 procedures performed under 13 weeks' gestation and a major complication rate of less than 1% [2], [3]. The rate of recognized uterine perforation during first-trimester surgical abortion ranges from 0.1 to 4 per

How much rigid dilation is needed to perform a suction abortion?

There is no consensus among providers regarding the desired width of dilation. Frequently, in early first-trimester procedures (<8 weeks), no dilation is required to insert the desired cannula, especially in multiparous women. In the past, when half-size Hegar dilators were preferred, providers dilated the cervix 0.5 to 2 mm less than the gestational age in weeks [12]. According to a recent survey of North American providers, approximately half report dilating the cervix to a diameter in

Level A: recommendations are based primarily on good and consistent scientific evidence

  • Advancing gestational age and provider inexperience are risk factors for immediate complications during first-trimester surgical abortion.

  • Adolescents are at higher risk for cervical injury than adult women.

  • Cervical priming may protect against complications such as cervical injury and uterine perforation; however, the absolute risk of these complications, given an experienced provider, is quite low.

  • Effective methods of cervical priming include osmotic dilators and misoprostol; the shortest time

Important questions to be answered

Further studies should evaluate whether routine cervical priming with misoprostol reduces the frequency of immediate complications during first-trimester suction aspiration. Given the rarity of such events and the dependency of these events on various factors (adolescence, parity, gestational age, prior cervical surgery and provider experience), an extremely large sample size would be required to detect a difference between misoprostol and placebo. The recently completed WHO trial [149] must

References (157)

  • R.G. Wheeler et al.

    Properties and safety of cervical dilators

    Am J Obstet Gynecol

    (1983)
  • H.K. Atrash et al.

    The effect of pregnancy termination on future reproduction

    Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol

    (1990)
  • I. de Haas et al.

    Spontaneous preterm birth: a case–control study

    Am J Obstet Gynecol

    (1991)
  • L. Henriet et al.

    Impact of induced abortions on subsequent pregnancy outcome: the 1995 French national perinatal survey

    BJOG

    (2001)
  • J.A. Martius et al.

    Risk factors associated with preterm (<37+0 weeks) and early preterm birth (<32+0 weeks): univariate and multivariate analysis of 106 345 singleton births from the 1994 statewide perinatal survey of Bavaria

    Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol

    (1998)
  • J.W. Buehler et al.

    The risk of serious complications from induced abortion: do personal characteristics make a difference?

    Am J Obstet Gynecol

    (1985)
  • E.S. Lichtenberg et al.

    First trimester surgical abortion practices: a survey of National Abortion Federation members

    Contraception

    (2001)
  • A. Olund et al.

    The effect of cervical dilatation by laminaria on the plasma levels of 15-keto-13,14-dihydro-PGF2 alpha

    Contraception

    (1984)
  • G. Sutkin et al.

    Toxic shock syndrome after laminaria insertion

    Obstet Gynecol

    (2001)
  • M. Chanda et al.

    Hypersensitivity reactions following laminaria placement

    Contraception

    (2000)
  • M.T. Nguyen et al.

    Anaphylaxis to laminaria

    J Allergy Clin Immunol

    (1995)
  • I.M. Usta et al.

    Long-term complications and ultrasound findings in retained Dilapan fragments

    Int J Gynaecol Obstet

    (1999)
  • K.R. Meckstroth et al.

    Prostaglandins for first-trimester termination

    Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol

    (2003)
  • W.F. O'Brien

    The role of prostaglandins in labor and delivery

    Clin Perinatol

    (1995)
  • H. el-Refaey et al.

    Cervical priming with prostaglandin E1 analogues, misoprostol and gemeprost

    Lancet

    (1994)
  • H. Bokstrom et al.

    Preoperative cervical softening before first trimester legal abortion by mifepristone and misoprostol: a double-blind, randomized, clinical, biochemical, and immunohistochemical study

    Contraception

    (1998)
  • N. Johnson et al.

    Could antiprogesterones be used as alternative cervical ripening agents?

    Am J Obstet Gynecol

    (1990)
  • A. Radestad et al.

    Induced cervical ripening with mifepristone in first trimester abortion. A double-blind randomized biomechanical study

    Contraception

    (1988)
  • M. Zieman et al.

    Absorption kinetics of misoprostol with oral or vaginal administration

    Obstet Gynecol

    (1997)
  • K.G. Danielsson et al.

    Comparison between oral and vaginal administration of misoprostol on uterine contractility

    Obstet Gynecol

    (1999)
  • M.D. Creinin et al.

    A randomized trial of the effect of moistening misoprostol before vaginal administration when used with methotrexate for abortion

    Contraception

    (1999)
  • E.A. Schaff et al.

    Comparison of misoprostol plasma concentrations following buccal and sublingual administration

    Contraception

    (2005)
  • A. Aronsson et al.

    Sublingual compared with oral misoprostol for cervical dilatation prior to vacuum aspiration: a randomized comparison

    Contraception

    (2004)
  • L.B. Finer et al.

    Abortion incidence and services in the United States in 2000

    Perspect Sex Reprod Health

    (2003)
  • L.A. Bartlett et al.

    Risk factors for legal induced abortion-related mortality in the United States

    Obstet Gynecol

    (2004)
  • Royal College of General Practitioners et al.

    Induced abortion operations and their early sequelae

    J R Coll Gen Pract

    (1985)
  • L. Andolsek et al.

    The safety of local anesthesia and outpatient treatment: a controlled study of induced abortion by vacuum aspiration

    Stud Fam Plann

    (1977)
  • B.I. Nesheim

    Induced abortion by the suction method. An analysis of complication rates

    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

    (1984)
  • W. Cates et al.

    The risks associated with teenage abortion

    N Engl J Med

    (1983)
  • L. Heisterberg et al.

    Early complications after induced first-trimester abortion

    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

    (1987)
  • E. Hakim-Elahi et al.

    Complications of first-trimester abortion: a report of 170,000 cases

    Obstet Gynecol

    (1990)
  • L.E. Ferris et al.

    Factors associated with immediate abortion complications

    Can Med Assoc J

    (1996)
  • W. Zhou et al.

    Short-term complications after surgically induced abortions: a register-based study of 56 117 abortions

    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

    (2002)
  • D.A. Grimes et al.

    Prevention of uterine perforation during curettage abortion

    JAMA

    (1984)
  • G. Lindell et al.

    Management of uterine perforations in connection with legal abortions

    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand

    (1995)
  • F. Novak et al.

    Comparison of the medical effects of induced abortion by two methods, curettage and vacuum aspiration

  • R.W. Hale et al.

    Laminaria: an underutilized clinical adjunct

    Clin Obstet Gynecol

    (1972)
  • K.R. Niswander

    Laminaria tents as an aid in suction abortion

    Calif Med

    (1973)
  • W.M. Hern

    Laminaria in abortion. Use in 1368 patients in first trimester

    Rocky Mt Med J

    (1975)
  • P. Moberg

    Uterine perforation in connection with vacuum aspiration

    Int J Gynaecol Obstet

    (1976)
  • Cited by (57)

    • Cervical priming before surgical abortion up to 13<sup>+6</sup> weeks’ gestation: a systematic review and metaanalyses for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence—new clinical guidelines for England

      2020, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology MFM
      Citation Excerpt :

      It is unclear whether the benefits of its use outweigh its adverse effects and if its use should be restricted to particular groups. Therefore, there is variation in care and recommendations from national and international guidelines,1,2 although United Kingdom guidelines from 2011 state that “cervical preparation should be considered in all cases.”3 Cervical priming before surgical abortion was identified as being an important topic for review by stakeholders in the scoping phase of the development of the 2019 abortion care clinical guideline by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text