ABORTION IN THE SECOND TRIMESTER OF PREGNANCY
Abstract
Medical abortion has revolutionized access to quality abortion services in obstetrics and gynecology. However, the issues of termination in the second trimester of pregnancy in women with a uterine scar still remain controversial. The urgency of the problem is associated with such a serious obstetric complication as uterine rupture along the scar. Objective. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of medical abortion in patients at 18-22 weeks of pregnancy. Materials and methods. A prospective cohort study was conducted without blinding (pregnant women and doctors knew which method was used to terminate the pregnancy). 15 patients were included in the gestational age of 18-22 weeks, including 7 with a uterine scar after a previous cesarean section. For the purpose of medical termination of pregnancy, a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol was used. A clinical and statistical assessment of the obtained data was carried out. Results. The total duration of abortion after taking misoprostol was on average 9.5 (95% CI 8.346-10.168) hours and did not differ in the group of pregnant women with a uterine scar - 9.8 (95% CI 9.346-10.202) hours and without a uterine scar - 9.6 (95% CI 9.356-10.217) hours (p>0.05). The volume of blood loss was in the range of 180.0 (95% CI 150.0–200.0) ml. A positive effect was achieved in 100% of cases. Pathology associated with the separation of the placenta was identified in 2 (13.3%) cases in the presence of a scar on the uterus after cesarean section. Conclusion. The presence of a previous uterine scar after cesarean section did not affect the duration of abortion. In most cases, for successful termination of pregnancy at 18-22 weeks, the maximum dose of oral misoprostol was 1200 mcg.
Keywords:
abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy, cesarean section, mifepristone, misoprostol, congenital fetal growth, preconception preparation.References
1. Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller A-B, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C, et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990–2019. Lancet Glob Health.2020;8(9):e1152-e1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30315-6
2. Whitehouse K, Brant A, Fonhus MS, Lavelanet A, Ganatra B. Medical regimens for abortion at 12 weeks and above: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Contracept X. 2020;2:100037. Published 2020 Aug 20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. conx.2020.100037
3. Авдеев А. Анализ демографической ситуации в Кыргызстане: обновление 2020 г. Демографические вызовы в развитии Кыргызской Республики. Аналитическая записка. ЮНФПА; 2021. 32 с. Режим доступа:: https://kyrgyzstan. unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/rus_1.pdf
4. Кыргыз Республикасынын Улуттук статистикалык комитети. Аборттордун саны (учурлар). Жеткиликтүү: www.stat.kg/kg/opendata/category/262/
5. Асылбашева Р., Мурзакаримова Л. Эрманбетов А., Максутова Э., Болоцких И., Мамбетаипова Ч. И др. Программа пятилетнего плана по постепенному увеличению государственного финансирования для обеспечения потребностей 50% женщин из групп высокого медицинского и социального рисков материнской смертности до 2023 года. Бишкек; 2022. 54 с. Режим доступа: https://kyrgyzstan.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/5_year_plan_-_rus_0.pdf
6. Дикке Г.Б. Медикаментозный аборт в амбулаторной практике. М.: ГЭОТАР-Медиа; 2018. 384 с.
7. Всемирная организация здравоохранения. Руководство по уходу при прерывании беременности: основные положения. Женева: ВОЗ; 2022. 19 с. Режим доступа: https://iris.who.int/rest/bitstreams/1416761/retrieve
8. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990-2014. PLоS ONE. 2016;11(2): e0148343. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0148343
9. World Health Organization. WHO statement on cesarean delivery. April 2015. Available from: http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publicati ons/maternal_ perinatal_health/csstatement/en/
10. Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, Barros AJD, Barros FC, Juan L, et al. Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. The Lancet. 2018;382(10155):1341-1348. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31928-7
11. Национальный статистический комитет Кыргызской Республики. Женщины и мужчины Кыргызской Республики: 2016–2020. Бишкек; 2021. 307 с. Режим доступа: http://www.stat.kg/media/publicationarchive/b057b115-c40b-4180-ae16-28ec7e459117.pdf
12. Туруктуу өнүгүү максаттары. Жеткиликтүү: https://kyrgyzstan.un.org/ky/sdgs
13. Жолдошбекова Г.Ж., Стакеева Ч.А., Амираева Ж.Н., Тогузбаева Б.Д., Айтбек к. Д., Сыдыкова А.К. Родоразрешение беременных с антенатальной гибелью плода при наличии рубца на матке после операции кесарево сечения. Вестник КГМА им. И.К. Ахунбаева. 2023;2:135-143. https://doi.org/10.54890/1694-6405_2023_2_135
14. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. FIGO Mifepristone & Misoprostol and Misoprostol Only Dosing Charts 2023. Available from: https://www.figo.org/figo-mifepristone-misoprostol-and-misoprostol-only-dosing-charts-2023/
15. Newcombe RG. Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: Comparison of seven methods. Statistics in Medicine. 1998;17:857-872. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980430)17:8<857::aid-sim777>3.0.co;2-e
16. Пустотина О.А. Прегравидарная подготовка. Медицинский совет. 2017;13:64-70.
17. Планирование семьи: универсальное руководство для поставщиков услуг по планированию семьи. Обновленное 3-е издание 2018 г. Копенгаген: Европейское региональное бюро ВОЗ; 2021. 562 с. Режим доступа: https://www.who.int/ru/publications/i/item/9780999203705
18. Пренаталдык даярдык боюнча клиникалык колдонмолор (биринчи медициналык жардам көрсөтүү үчүн). Бишкек; 2022. 89 б. Жеткиликтүү: https://med.kg/clinicalProtocols?locale=ru
19. Morris JL, Winikoff B, Dabash R, Weeks A, Faundes A, Gemzell-Danielsson K, at al. FIGO’s updated recommendations for misoprostol used alone in gynecology and obstetrics. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2017;138(3):363–366. https://doi.org/ 10.1002/ijgo.12181
