ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025
Miscarriage treatment-related adverse events: A nationwide registry study from Finland.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Miscarriage treatment-related adverse events: A nationwide registry study from Finland.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe treatment of miscarriage has transformed substantially from surgical to non-surgical. The aim of this study was to evaluate the rates of adverse events related to the treatment of miscarriage and their risk factors. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis nationwide retrospective cohort study included 69 593 fertile-aged (15-49 years) women who experienced their first miscarriage during 1998-2016 and received a diagnostic code of missed abortion or blighted ovum in a public hospital. We used data from the Finnish National Hospital Discharge Registry (NHDR). Miscarriage type, treatment modalities, and treatment-related adverse events (secondary surgery for any reason, infection and severe adverse events) were identified using diagnostic and surgical procedure codes.
resultsSince 2004, non-surgical management has been the dominant treatment of miscarriage in Finland. Between 1998 and 2016, a total of 11 397 women (16.4%) experienced at least one miscarriage treatment-related adverse event. The need for secondary surgery was the most common adverse event and more common after primary non-surgical treatment (22.0% vs. 3.8%). However, the annual rate of secondary surgery after non-surgical treatment declined from 34.8% in 1998 to 15.9% in 2016. The total number of women undergoing surgical treatment (primary or secondary) declined from 3918 (84.6%) to 651 (23.1%). Age was associated with an increased risk of secondary surgery (age ≥ 25; Adjusted odds ratio [AdjOR] 1.15, 95% CI 1.07-1.24) and with a decreased overall risk of infection (age 40-49 years; AdjOR 0.51 [0.40-0.63]). Parity was associated with lower risk of secondary surgery (one delivery, AdjOR 0.82 [0.78-0.95], and ≥2 deliveries, AdjOR 0.75, [0.71-0.84]) and infection (one delivery, AdjOR 0.85, [0.77-0.95]; ≥2 deliveries, AdjOR 0.74 [0.66-0.84]). Severe adverse events were rare (0.2%-0.4%) and did not differ between the two treatment options for either type of miscarriage.
conclusionsDespite significant changes in miscarriage treatment practices, no substantial or alarming increase in treatment-associated adverse events was detected. Both treatment options proved safe for the two types of miscarriage studied. These findings are important regarding the provision of individualized counseling and for the allocation of healthcare resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.