Misoprostol for cervical ripening before diagnostic hysteroscopy in nulliparous women

Comparison of Effectiveness of Laminaria versus Vaginal Misoprostol for Cervical Preparation Before Operative Hysteroscopy in Women of Reproductive Age: A Prospective Randomized Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of intracervical laminaria dilator versus intravaginal misoprostol administered before surgery to facilitate cervical dilation before operative hysteroscopy.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized study (Canadian Task Force classification 1).

SETTING

A university hospital.

PATIENTS

A total of 150 women were assigned at random to the following groups: laminaria dilation (n = 50), misoprostol dilation (n = 50), and mechanical dilation (n = 50).

INTERVENTIONS

Hysteroscopic surgery of intrauterine lesions.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In this study, 150 women were assigned at random to receive cervical priming with an intracervical laminaria dilator, 200 μg of intravaginal misoprostol, or a mechanical dilator before operative hysteroscopy. Cervical response, surgical outcome, and complications of operative hysteroscopy were assessed. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were recorded in the misoprostol and laminaria dilation groups. Demographic variables of the study groups were comparable (p = .278-.988). The duration of cervical pretreatment was similar with the intracervical laminaria dilator and intravaginal misoprostol (p = .803); however, intravaginal misoprostol was associated with more adverse effects (p = .031). Compared with the misoprostol dilation group, in which all patients required additional cervical dilation, notably fewer patients in the laminaria dilation group required additional cervical dilation after cervical preparation (p = .001). VAS pain scores were significantly higher in the laminaria dilation group, however (p = .001).

CONCLUSION

Cervical priming with an intracervical laminaria dilator before operative hysteroscopy reduces the need for cervical dilation and better facilitates hysteroscopic surgery compared with intravaginal misoprostol. Oral analgesic use may be required before the use of this device.

Cervical priming before diagnostic operative hysteroscopy in infertile women: a randomized, double-blind, controlled comparison of 2 vaginal misoprostol doses

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol for cervical priming at doses of 200 mcg and 400 mcg, 12 to 15 hours before diagnostic office hysteroscopy (OH) without anesthesia in patients with infertility. Sixty infertile patients requiring a diagnostic office hysteroscopy for investigation of infertility were included in the study. The patients were randomly allocated into 3 vaginally administered misoprostol groups: (1) control group, (2) 200-mcg dose group, and (3) 400-mcg dose group. Misoprostol significantly facilitated the procedure of OH: cervical entry was easier; procedural time was shorter; baseline cervical width was larger; and pain scoring was lower in the misoprostol groups compared with the control group. Increasing the dose of misoprostol from 200 mcg to 400 mcg did not improve the effect on cervical dilation. Misoprostol is a promising analog to use for cervical priming before OH. Since doses of 200 mcg and 400 mcg vaginal misoprostol 12 hours before the OH both have proven to be effective regimens, 200 mcg may be preferred. However, before routine clinical usage, further research is needed through large, randomized, controlled trials powered to detect a difference in complications to determine whether misoprostol reduces complications in OH.