In Reply:

In Reply: We appreciate the thoughtful comments regarding our study in the February 2025 issue.1 After thoroughly reviewing these comments and discussing them within the investigating team, we would like to address the points raised. Regarding the follow-up duration, our current protocol dictates a follow-up of patients until their first menstrual period after treatment, with outcome measures assessed during this timeframe; an additional transvaginal ultrasonogram is recommended at this timepoint. Although this approach may differ from fixed timepoint follow-up, we believe it better reflects the physiologic recovery process after early pregnancy loss and does better ensure that no negative outcomes are overlooked. Concerning the selection of variables for our multivariable analysis, we included factors that were either previously established as significant predictors of treatment success or showed statistical significance in our univariate analysis. Prior vaginal deliveries were included based on existing evidence demonstrating their association with improved treatment outcomes.2–4 Although we acknowledge the potential importance of body mass index (BMI) and recent vaginal bleeding as predictors, unfortunately, we were unable to extract these data from our medical records because they were not consistently noted, thereby preventing their inclusion in the analysis. Regarding the article title, it was modified during the peer-review process to align with current terminology in the field. However, we agree that greater specificity would be beneficial, and we appreciate this suggestion for future work in this area.