Comparison of dydrogesterone tablet and progesterone suppository effects on the outcome of pregnancy in pregnant women with threatened abortion: A Randomized Clinical Trial

F. Nanbakhsh, Tahereh Behrouzi-Lak, Fariba Amiri, S. Oshnouei
{"title":"Comparison of dydrogesterone tablet and progesterone suppository effects on the outcome of pregnancy in pregnant women with threatened abortion: A Randomized Clinical Trial","authors":"F. Nanbakhsh, Tahereh Behrouzi-Lak, Fariba Amiri, S. Oshnouei","doi":"10.15412/J.JBTW.01041101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"The aim of this study was to compare the effects of oral and suppository of Progesterone in pregnant women lower than 12th weeks of gestation with threatened abortion to prevent miscarriage. This random clinical trial study was conducted on 200 pregnant women with threatened abortion and gestational age ≤ 12 weeks who were referred to Kosar obstetrics and gynecology clinic in Shahid Motahari hospital affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences, 2014. All study population was randomly divided into two equal groups considering the amount of vaginal bleeding (mild to moderate). Group I (received Dydrogesterone tablet) and group II (received Progesterone suppository). The participants' data such as age, gestational age, history for vaginal bleeding in previous pregnancies, the amount of vaginal bleeding were collected in the researcher- made questionnaire. The mean gestational age at the first ultrasound assessment in the group I and II was 9.28 ± 2.68 weeks and 9.41 ± 3.45 weeks, respectively (P = 0.76). In the group I, 53 (53%) of patients had mild vaginal bleeding and 47 (47%) of them had moderate vaginal bleeding. These figures in the group II were 46 (46%) and 54 (54%) respectively (P = 0.19). In the group I, 74 (74%) of pregnancies ended in birth while 26 (26%) of pregnancies were aborted. In the group II 78 (78%) of women had full- term pregnancy and 22 (22%) of them had abortion (P = 0.31). In the current study, no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of continuing the pregnancy. But because of using oral Dydrogesterone are more convenient for patients as compare as vaginal Progesterone,and it is suggested that Dydrogesterone tablets are more prescribed for threatened abortion patients.\"","PeriodicalId":119340,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Biology and Today`s World","volume":"423 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Biology and Today`s World","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15412/J.JBTW.01041101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

"The aim of this study was to compare the effects of oral and suppository of Progesterone in pregnant women lower than 12th weeks of gestation with threatened abortion to prevent miscarriage. This random clinical trial study was conducted on 200 pregnant women with threatened abortion and gestational age ≤ 12 weeks who were referred to Kosar obstetrics and gynecology clinic in Shahid Motahari hospital affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences, 2014. All study population was randomly divided into two equal groups considering the amount of vaginal bleeding (mild to moderate). Group I (received Dydrogesterone tablet) and group II (received Progesterone suppository). The participants' data such as age, gestational age, history for vaginal bleeding in previous pregnancies, the amount of vaginal bleeding were collected in the researcher- made questionnaire. The mean gestational age at the first ultrasound assessment in the group I and II was 9.28 ± 2.68 weeks and 9.41 ± 3.45 weeks, respectively (P = 0.76). In the group I, 53 (53%) of patients had mild vaginal bleeding and 47 (47%) of them had moderate vaginal bleeding. These figures in the group II were 46 (46%) and 54 (54%) respectively (P = 0.19). In the group I, 74 (74%) of pregnancies ended in birth while 26 (26%) of pregnancies were aborted. In the group II 78 (78%) of women had full- term pregnancy and 22 (22%) of them had abortion (P = 0.31). In the current study, no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of continuing the pregnancy. But because of using oral Dydrogesterone are more convenient for patients as compare as vaginal Progesterone,and it is suggested that Dydrogesterone tablets are more prescribed for threatened abortion patients."
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
地屈孕酮片与孕酮栓对先兆流产孕妇妊娠结局的影响:一项随机临床试验
“本研究的目的是比较口服和栓剂黄体酮对妊娠12周以下先兆流产孕妇预防流产的效果。本随机临床试验研究选取2014年在乌尔米娅医科大学附属Shahid Motahari医院Kosar妇产科门诊转诊的200例胎龄≤12周的先兆流产孕妇。根据阴道出血量(轻度至中度)将所有研究人群随机分为两组。第一组(使用地屈孕酮片),第二组(使用孕酮栓剂)。研究人员在问卷中收集了参与者的年龄、胎龄、阴道出血史、阴道出血量等数据。ⅰ组和ⅱ组首次超声检查时平均胎龄分别为9.28±2.68周和9.41±3.45周(P = 0.76)。I组53例(53%)患者阴道轻度出血,47例(47%)患者阴道中度出血。II组分别为46例(46%)和54例(54%)(P = 0.19)。在第一组中,74例(74%)妊娠以分娩结束,26例(26%)妊娠流产。II组足月妊娠78例(78%),流产22例(22%)(P = 0.31)。在目前的研究中,两组在继续妊娠方面没有发现显著差异。但由于口服地屈孕酮比阴道使用更方便,因此建议地屈孕酮片更多地用于先兆流产患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Suspected Cardiovascular Side Effects of two Covid-19 Vaccines Investigation of Blood Selenium and Zinc in Type2 Diabetes with TCF7L2 (rs7903146 C/T) Genotypes Maternal and Perinatal Outcome, a Case Report of Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation Following Snakebite after Treatment with Polyvalent Anti-snake Bites A Review of Bio Inspired Computing and its Applications Survey of Antioxidant and Cytotoxic Activities of Gracilaria corticata (a Red Seaweed), Against RKO, AGS and HepG2 Human Cancer Cell Lines
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1