You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 251 No. 16, April 27, 1984 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (97)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Prevention of Uterine Perforation During Curettage Abortion

David A. Grimes, MD; Kenneth F. Schulz, MBA; Willard J. Cates, Jr, MD, MPH

JAMA. 1984;251(16):2108-2111.


Abstract

Although uterine perforation is a potentially life-threatening complication of curettage abortion, little is known about the risk factors associated with uterine perforation or how to prevent it. Using linear logistic regression, we analyzed 67,175 curettage abortions performed at 13 institutions in the United States from 1975 through 1978. The overall incidence of confirmed perforation was 0.9 per 1,000 abortions. Performance of the abortion by a resident rather than by an attending physician was a powerful risk factor for perforation (relative risk, 5.5; 95% confidence interval, 3.3 to 9.2). Use of Laminaria for dilation had a protective effect, although this effect was not statistically significant (relative risk, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.02 to 1.2). Among factors beyond the control of the physician, advancement of gestational age and previous delivery were significant risk factors. Use of Laminaria and performance of the abortion by an attending physician considerably lowered the risk of uterine perforation.

(JAMA 1984;251:2108-2111)



Author Affiliations

From the Division of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta.


Footnotes

Reprint requests to Division of Reproductive Health, Centers for Disease Control, Bldg 1, Room 4419, 1600 Clifton Rd NE, Atlanta, GA 30333 (Dr Grimes).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Mid-trimester induced abortion: a review
Lalitkumar et al.
Hum Reprod Update 2007;13:37-52.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

A randomized study comparing the use of sublingual to vaginal misoprostol for pre-operative cervical priming prior to surgical termination of pregnancy in the first trimester
Tang et al.
Hum Reprod 2004;19:1101-1104.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Magnetic resonance imaging of the human cervix: a study of the effects of prostaglandins in the first trimester
Rae et al.
Hum Reprod 2001;16:1744-1747.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Misoprostol and Pregnancy
Goldberg et al.
NEJM 2001;344:38-47.
FULL TEXT  

Cavitary Lung Disease
King et al.
Chest 2001;119:300-302.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Does an acidic medium enhance the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol for pre-abortion cervical priming?
Singh et al.
Hum Reprod 1999;14:1635-1637.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1984 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.