The Success of Mifepristone and Misoprostol in the Management of Early Pregnancy Loss at a Community Hospital: A Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This prospective single-arm study was conducted to understand the expulsion rate of the gestational sac in the management of early pregnancy loss (EPL). METHODS: We recruited 441 participants; 188 met the eligibility criteria. Participants were 18 years of age and older who experienced a confirmed EPL (<12 weeks gestational age) defined by an intrauterine pregnancy with a non-viable embryonic or anembryonic gestational sac with no fetal heart activity. Participants were given 200 mg of mifepristone pre-treatment orally followed by 2 doses of misoprostol 800 μg vaginally after 24 and 48 hours. Participants were seen in follow-up on day 14 to confirm the absence of a gestational sac, classified as treatment success. For failed treatment (defined by retained gestational sac), we offered expectant management or a third dose of misoprostol and/or dilatation and curettage. We followed all participants for 30 days. We collected data on overtreatment for retained products of conception and hospital admissions for adverse events. RESULTS: Overall, 181 participants followed the protocol and 169 (93.3%) participants had a complete expulsion of the gestational sac by the second visit (day 14). Twelve (6.6%) failed the treatment and 1 had an adverse event of heavy vaginal bleeding requiring dilatation and curettage. Despite the expulsion of the gestational sac, 29 cases (17.1%) at subsequent follow-up were diagnosed as retained products of conception based on ultrasound assessment of thickened endometrium. CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with mifepristone followed by 2 doses of misoprostol with a 14-day follow-up resulted in a high expulsion rate and is a safe management option for EPL.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".