Human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) in the management of recurrent abortion; results of a multi-centre placebo-controlled study

European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 47(3), 175-179

DOI 10.1016/0028-2243(92)90147-q PMID 1294401

Abstract

An international ten-centre double-blind trial comparing hCG with placebo in the management of habitual abortion was conducted. The dose regime for hCG used was 10,000 IU i.m. on first diagnosis of pregnancy, 5000 IU thence twice weekly to week 12, followed by once weekly up to week 16. Identical ampoulage of placebo was used. Seventy-five patients completed the trial. Thirty-six received hCG and thirty-nine placebo. 83% of the pregnancies on hCG were successful compared with 79% on placebo (P = 0.45). Of the 25 defined as having no cause for their habitual abortion history, 83% on hCG were successful, as were 85% on placebo (P = 0.73). No significant differences were found between the two therapies in terms of delivery weight, placental weight or neonatal Apgar score. This study fails to confirm previous promising placebo-controlled data advocating the use of hCG in habitual abortion.

Topics

hCG human chorionic gonadotropin recurrent miscarriage treatment, hCG habitual abortion placebo-controlled trial management, Harrison recurrent abortion hCG multi-centre trial, recurrent pregnancy loss hCG supplementation early pregnancy, double-blind trial hCG placebo recurrent miscarriage, hCG 10000 IU recurrent abortion protocol first trimester, unexplained recurrent miscarriage hCG treatment efficacy, hormonal support early pregnancy recurrent spontaneous abortion, hCG luteal support habitual abortion randomized trial, recurrent pregnancy loss no identifiable cause hCG treatment outcome
PMID 1294401 1294401 DOI 10.1016/0028-2243(92)90147-q 10.1016/0028-2243(92)90147-q

Cite this article

Harrison, R. F. (1992). Human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) in the management of recurrent abortion; results of a multi-centre placebo-controlled study. *European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology*, *47*(3), 175-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-2243(92)90147-q

Related articles