Cervical LacerationNCT02159911
Oral Misoprostol for Cervical Priming Before Hysteroscopy
An observational study of Cervical Laceration and Adverse Effects, run by Saint-Joseph University at 1 site in Lebanon.
Trial summary
A randomized, double blind study to compare 200 and 400 mcg misoprostol for cervical preparation before hysteroscopy. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Cervical Laceration, Adverse Effects
- What is being tested?
- Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine
- How many people
- 84 participants
- Where
- 1 siteLebanon
- Study dates
- Jun 2004to Nov 2004
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: All patients admitted for hysteroscopy were offered participation in the study, and those choosing to participate were assessed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study protocol
Who may be able to join
- non pregnant patients
- considered medically fit without any life threatening conditions
- scheduled for operative hysteroscopy, regardless of age or indication of the hysteroscopy
Who cannot join
- a positive history of vascular or coronary artery disease
- using other products that could affect the consistency of the cervix such as local estrogen or laminaire
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Use of Oral Misoprostol for Cervical Priming Before Hysteroscopy: a Randomized Comparison of Two Dosages
A randomized, double blind study to compare 200 and 400 mcg misoprostol for cervical preparation before hysteroscopy.
Read the detailed description
All patients admitted for hysteroscopy were offered participation in the study, and those choosing to participate were assessed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study protocol. The investigators included all non pregnant patients who were considered medically fit and scheduled for operative hysteroscopy, regardless of age or indication of the hysteroscopy. Patients with a positive history of vascular or coronary artery disease and patients using other products that could affect the consistency of the cervix such as local estrogen or laminaire were excluded from the study. To achieve a mean difference of 0.5 in the diffculty of dilation and a mean difference of 0.5 in the First Hegar with a power of 80% at 0.05 statistical significance, a sample of 163 patients in each arm is needed. However, the investigators patients pool did not permit to recruit more than 70 women so the investigators took it as a convenience sample of a total of 70 women that agreed to be recruited for the trial. An informed consent was obtained after explaining to the patients the benefit and the eventual risk or adverse effects associated with the medication. Studied factors were: age, parity, reason for the procedure, history of cervical dilation and history of cervical surgery.
Seventy closed and numbered envelopes, containing a capsule with either 200mcg or 400mcg of misoprostol were randomly distributed to these 70 patients. Each envelope was coded randomly and only the pharmaceutical department of the hospital knew the content of these envelopes and kept a list of their codes.
The misoprostol was administered by the floor nurse, per-os to the patient one hour before hysteroscopy with a small amount of water. The number on the envelope was noted by the nurse on the document relative to the patient. Hence, the patient, the physician performing the biopsy, the nurse and the research associate did not know the exact dose of misoprostol that was ingested by the patient.
Three physicians contributed to the study. Before beginning the procedure, the operator noted by pelvic examination the position of the cervix. He then noted the size/number of the first Hegar dilator used, the maximal dilation reached, the difficulty to dilate during the intervention (measured by a scale from 1 to 10), cervical injuries, bleeding or uterine perforation and the duration of the operation. A rigid hysteroscope (Storz, 27 F) was used for all procedures.
Adverse effects that could be related to misoprostol (uterine cramps, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and fever), were reported before and up to 6 hours after surgery.
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 18. Means comparison was done using t-test for continuous variables such as difficulty in dilation or first Hegar (the data was normally distributed). Frequency and percent distribution were compared between the two treatment groups using χ2 test when the expected cell count was 5 or more; in cases where the expected cell count was less than 5, the Fisher exact test was used instead
- Conditions
- Cervical Laceration, Adverse Effects
- Being tested
- Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery
- Keywords
- Cervical, Hysteroscopy, Misoprostol, Oral
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgeryDrug
Also called ( Cytotec*)
Closed and numbered envelopes, containing a capsule with either 200mcg or 400mcg of misoprostol were randomly distributed to the patients. Each envelope was coded randomly and only the pharmaceutical department of the hospital knew the content of these envelopes and kept a list of their codes.
The misoprostol was administered by the floor nurse, per-os to the patient one hour before hysteroscopy with a small amount of water. The number on the envelope was noted by the nurse on the document relative to the patient. Hence, the patient, the physician performing the biopsy, the nurse and the research associate did not know the exact dose of misoprostol that was ingested by the patient.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| 200 mcg misoprostol | Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery Receives: Drug: Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery | |
| 400 mcg misoprostol | Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery Receives: Drug: Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Ease of cervical dilatation
Measured by a scale from 1 to 10
Measured: Assessed during the surgery and recorded immediately at the end of surgery
Secondary outcomes (1)
Adverse effects
uterine cramps, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and fever
Measured: recorded till 6 h following surgery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted10 Jun 2014 (estimated)
- Study startJun 2004
- Primary completionNov 2004
- Study completionNov 2004
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cervical LacerationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 84 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Saint-Joseph University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Assaad K Kesrouani, MD, Principal investigator, Saint-Joseph University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02159911
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- USJ-002
- Status last verified
- Jun 2014
- First submitted
- 2 Jun 2014
- Last updated
- 10 Jun 2014
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Lee YY, Kim TJ, Kang H, Choi CH, Lee JW, Kim BG, Bae DS. The use of misoprostol before hysteroscopic surgery in non-pregnant premenopausal women: a randomized comparison of sublingual, oral and vaginal administrations. Hum Reprod. 2010 Aug;25(8):1942-8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq083. Epub 2010 Jun 11.
PubMed 20542898Bastu E, Celik C, Nehir A, Dogan M, Yuksel B, Ergun B. Cervical priming before diagnostic operative hysteroscopy in infertile women: a randomized, double-blind, controlled comparison of 2 vaginal misoprostol doses. Int Surg. 2013 Apr-Jun;98(2):140-4. doi: 10.9738/INTSURG-D-12-00024.1.
PubMed 23701149
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Jun 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Use of Oral Misoprostol for Cervical Priming Before Hysteroscopy: a Randomized Comparison of Two Dosages
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02159911
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- USJ-002
- Conditions
- Cervical Laceration, Adverse Effects
- Keywords
- Cervical, Hysteroscopy, Misoprostol, Oral
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 84 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Saint-Joseph UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jun 2004
- Primary completion
- Nov 2004 (actual)
- Study completion
- Nov 2004 (actual)
- First posted
- 10 Jun 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A randomized, double blind study to compare 200 and 400 mcg misoprostol for cervical preparation before hysteroscopy.
Detailed description
All patients admitted for hysteroscopy were offered participation in the study, and those choosing to participate were assessed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study protocol. The investigators included all non pregnant patients who were considered medically fit and scheduled for operative hysteroscopy, regardless of age or indication of the hysteroscopy. Patients with a positive history of vascular or coronary artery disease and patients using other products that could affect the consistency of the cervix such as local estrogen or laminaire were excluded from the study. To achieve a mean difference of 0.5 in the diffculty of dilation and a mean difference of 0.5 in the First Hegar with a power of 80% at 0.05 statistical significance, a sample of 163 patients in each arm is needed. However, the investigators patients pool did not permit to recruit more than 70 women so the investigators took it as a convenience sample of a total of 70 women that agreed to be recruited for the trial. An informed consent was obtained after explaining to the patients the benefit and the eventual risk or adverse effects associated with the medication. Studied factors were: age, parity, reason for the procedure, history of cervical dilation and history of cervical surgery.
Seventy closed and numbered envelopes, containing a capsule with either 200mcg or 400mcg of misoprostol were randomly distributed to these 70 patients. Each envelope was coded randomly and only the pharmaceutical department of the hospital knew the content of these envelopes and kept a list of their codes.
The misoprostol was administered by the floor nurse, per-os to the patient one hour before hysteroscopy with a small amount of water. The number on the envelope was noted by the nurse on the document relative to the patient. Hence, the patient, the physician performing the biopsy, the nurse and the research associate did not know the exact dose of misoprostol that was ingested by the patient.
Three physicians contributed to the study. Before beginning the procedure, the operator noted by pelvic examination the position of the cervix. He then noted the size/number of the first Hegar dilator used, the maximal dilation reached, the difficulty to dilate during the intervention (measured by a scale from 1 to 10), cervical injuries, bleeding or uterine perforation and the duration of the operation. A rigid hysteroscope (Storz, 27 F) was used for all procedures.
Adverse effects that could be related to misoprostol (uterine cramps, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and fever), were reported before and up to 6 hours after surgery.
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 18. Means comparison was done using t-test for continuous variables such as difficulty in dilation or first Hegar (the data was normally distributed). Frequency and percent distribution were compared between the two treatment groups using χ2 test when the expected cell count was 5 or more; in cases where the expected cell count was less than 5, the Fisher exact test was used instead
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 200 mcg misoprostol | – | Drug: Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgeryMisoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery |
| 400 mcg misoprostol | – | Drug: Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgeryMisoprostol administered orally one hour before surgery |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- All patients admitted for hysteroscopy were offered participation in the study, and those choosing to participate were assessed according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study protocol
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- non pregnant patients
- considered medically fit without any life threatening conditions
- scheduled for operative hysteroscopy, regardless of age or indication of the hysteroscopy
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- a positive history of vascular or coronary artery disease
- using other products that could affect the consistency of the cervix such as local estrogen or laminaire
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Misoprostol administered orally one hour before surgeryAlso: ( Cytotec*)Closed and numbered envelopes, containing a capsule with either 200mcg or 400mcg of misoprostol were randomly distributed to the patients. Each envelope was coded randomly and only the pharmaceutical department of the hospital knew the content of these envelopes and kept a list of their codes. The misoprostol was administered by the floor nurse, per-os to the patient one hour before hysteroscopy with a small amount of water. The number on the envelope was noted by the nurse on the document relative to the patient. Hence, the patient, the physician performing the biopsy, the nurse and the research associate did not know the exact dose of misoprostol that was ingested by the patient. | Drug | 200 mcg misoprostol, 400 mcg misoprostol |
Primary outcome
Ease of cervical dilatation
Time frame: Assessed during the surgery and recorded immediately at the end of surgery
Measured by a scale from 1 to 10
1 secondary outcome
Adverse effects
Time frame: recorded till 6 h following surgery
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Jun 2014.
- Results publication: PubMed 20542898Lee YY, Kim TJ, Kang H, Choi CH, Lee JW, Kim BG, Bae DS. The use of misoprostol before hysteroscopic surgery in non-pregnant premenopausal women: a randomized comparison of sublingual, oral and vaginal administrations. Hum Reprod. 2010 Aug;25(8):1942-8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq083. Epub 2010 Jun 11.
- Results publication: PubMed 23701149Bastu E, Celik C, Nehir A, Dogan M, Yuksel B, Ergun B. Cervical priming before diagnostic operative hysteroscopy in infertile women: a randomized, double-blind, controlled comparison of 2 vaginal misoprostol doses. Int Surg. 2013 Apr-Jun;98(2):140-4. doi: 10.9738/INTSURG-D-12-00024.1.
Related trials for Cervical Laceration
Recruiting
Acne Face Wash for Reducing the Contamination Rate in Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Surgery
Rotator Cuff Tears of the Shoulder
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Assaad K Kesrouani, MD principal investigator
Saint-Joseph University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Cervical Laceration and Adverse Effects, run by Saint-Joseph University at 1 site in Lebanon.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Jun 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Lebanon. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Ease of cervical dilatation (time frame: Assessed during the surgery and recorded immediately at the end of surgery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02159911, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Jun 2014; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 6 Nov 2026.