Can a simple office procedure replace surgery for early miscarriage care?

NCT ID NCT07732231

First seen Jul 28, 2026 · Last updated Jul 29, 2026 · Updated 1 time

Summary

This trial compares two ways to surgically manage a first-trimester miscarriage: manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) done in a clinic with local anesthesia, versus electric aspiration (EA) performed in an operating room under general anesthesia. Researchers want to see if the outpatient approach is just as effective and less costly, while maintaining patient quality of life. The study involves 860 women aged 18 to 44 with a confirmed miscarriage needing surgical treatment.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) performed in consultation under local anesthesia versus electric aspiration (EA) in the operating room under general or regional anesthesia.
What this could lead to
If MVA proves as effective and less costly, it could become the standard, more accessible option for managing early miscarriage.
What could go wrong
This is a cost-effectiveness study, not a test of a new drug; results depend on real-world implementation and patient preferences.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY are added.

Our safety recommendation!

By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • CHU de Nantes

    Nantes, 44000, France

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.