Cost-utility Analysis of Outpatient Manual Vacuum Aspiration Versus Operating Room Electric Aspiration for the Management of First-trimester Miscarriage
ASPIR
2 other identifiers
interventional
860
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The ASPIR study aims to evaluate the cost-utility of outpatient manual vacuum aspiration compared with operating room electric aspiration for the management of first-trimester miscarriage. It is hypothesized that manual aspiration will demonstrate equivalent clinical efficacy and patient quality of life while reducing healthcare costs.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Oct 2026
Typical duration for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
May 28, 2026
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
July 28, 2026
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
October 1, 2026
ExpectedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
January 1, 2027
Study Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
October 1, 2029
July 28, 2026
July 1, 2026
3 months
May 28, 2026
July 27, 2026
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR)
Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of outpatient MVA compared to operating room EA, from a collective perspective.
3 months
Secondary Outcomes (15)
Annual net financial benefit for health insurance over up to 5 years of different development scenarios for manual vacuum aspiration in consultation for the management of pregnancies terminated before 12 weeks of gestation
up to 5 years
To compare the two management strategies in terms of success and intraoperative and postoperative complications
1 month
To assess patient satisfaction
day 1 and 2
To compare the two strategies (electric suction versus manual vacuum kit suction)
days 0, 1,7 and 1 and 3 months
The risk factors for failure
3 months
- +10 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA)
EXPERIMENTALOutpatient manual vacuum aspiration under local anesthesia and inhaled analgesia (MEOPA).
Electric aspiration in the operating room under general or regional anesthesia. Electric aspiration
ACTIVE COMPARATORElectric aspiration in the operating room under general or regional anesthesia. Performed in the operating room under general or regional anesthesia, using an electric suction device and appropriate cannula. Post-procedure pelvic ultrasound to confirm complete evacuation.
Interventions
Performed in consultation under local anesthesia and inhaled analgesia, using a manual vacuum aspirator and appropriate cannula. Post-procedure pelvic ultrasound to confirm complete evacuation.
Performed in the operating room under general or regional anesthesia, using an electric suction device and appropriate cannula. Post-procedure pelvic ultrasound to confirm complete evacuation.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Female, aged 18-44 years
- Ultrasound-confirmed first-trimester miscarriage requiring surgical management
- Gestational age between 5 and 12 weeks of amenorrhea
- Incomplete spontaneous abortion or ongoing non-viable pregnancy
- Patient able to provide oral informed consent
You may not qualify if:
- Complete expulsion of pregnancy (endometrial thickness \< 15 mm)
- Choice of medical treatment with misoprostol
- Elective termination of pregnancy
- Unwanted pregnancy
- Pregnancy of unknown location, molar pregnancy
- Known uterine malformation
- Prior surgical aspiration for the current pregnancy
- Intrauterine device in place
- Contraindicating medications (e.g. anticoagulants)
- Protected adults (under guardianship)
- Inability to complete study questionnaires
- Lack of social security coverage
- Haemorrhagic miscarriage
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
CHU de Nantes
Nantes, 44000, France
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Thibault Thubert, Pr
Nantes University Hospital
Central Study Contacts
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
May 28, 2026
First Posted
July 28, 2026
Study Start (Estimated)
October 1, 2026
Primary Completion (Estimated)
January 1, 2027
Study Completion (Estimated)
October 1, 2029
Last Updated
July 28, 2026
Record last verified: 2026-07