Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Kjølhede, P. et al.

An open prospective randomized study of dinoproston and gemeprost in second trimester legal abortions.

The aim of this open prospective randomized study was to compare two non-invasive methods for second trimester abortion using gemeprost pessaries (Cervagem) and dinoproston gel (Cerviprost) concerning effectiveness, time for abortion, consumption of analgesics, infection-rate and side-effects. Forty women admitted for second trimester legal abortion were allocated to treatment with either gemeprost (20) intravaginally or dinoproston (20) intracervically. All patients were pre-treated with a 3 mm in diameter Lamicel tent applied intracervically for about four hours. The success-rate was 95% for gemeprost and 75% for dinoproston within approximately 48 hours. The median abortion time calculated from the insertion of the Lamicel tent for the successful cases was 22 h 0 min for gemeprost and 24 h 5 min for dinoproston (not significant). The shortest abortion time was found among parous women in the Cervagem group. The difference between Cerviprost and Cervagem in parous women was statistically significant. For nonparous women there were no significant differences in abortion time between the two regimes. No significant difference was found in the demand of Pethidin and the infection-rate between the two groups. No major side effects of the treatment were found. Even if no significant difference in successful abortions was found, probably due to the small patient material, Cervagem seems to be the most appropriate of the two non-invasive methods, because of a 95 per cent success-rate within 48 hours, but also due to its simplicity in design.[1]

References

An open prospective randomized study of dinoproston and gemeprost in second trimester legal abortions. Kjølhede, P., Dahle, L.O., Matthiesen, L., Rydén, G., Ottosen, C. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica. (1994) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.