Objective To compare clinical efficacy for two cervical preparations for early secondtrimester pregnancy termination at 12-17 weeks gestation. Methods Seventy healthy women aged 18-41 years requesting legal termination of pregnancy at 12-17 weeks of gestation were equally randomized into two groups. Two cervical preparations, the Dilapan-STM combined with mifepristone and misoprostol (DMM) method, and the mifepristone combined with misoprostol (MM) method, were used to end early second-trimester pregnancy for group DMM and group MM, respectively. Clinical outcomes and complications for these two methods were compared. Results No differences were found on rates of successful abortion within 48 h and blood loss after abortion at 2 h between the two groups (P>0.05). DMM group had significant shorter induction-to-abortion interval and hospital stay compared with group MM (P<0.01). In both DMM and MM groups, side effects including nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, chills and rigors, and fever occurred, and incidences of these side effects were no difference (P>0.05). Conclusion DMM method would have similar clinical efficacies with MM method for early second-trimester pregnancy termination. Besides,DMM method has shorter induction-to-abortion interval and hospital stay, which benefits its clinical application. Objective To compare clinical efficacy for two cervical preparations for early secondtrimester pregnancy termination at 12-17 weeks gestation. Methods Seventy healthy women aged 18-41 years requesting legal termination of pregnancy at 12-17 weeks of gestation were equally randomized into two groups. Two cervical preparations, the Dilapan-STM combined with mifepristone and misoprostol (DMM) method, and the mifepristone combined with misoprostol (MM) method, were used to end early second-trimester pregnancy for group DMM and group MM, respectively. Clinical outcomes and complications for these two methods were compared. Results No differences were found on rates of successful abortion within 48 h and blood loss after abortion at 2 h between the two groups (P> 0.05). DMM group had significant shorter induction-to-abortion interval and hospital stay compared with group MM (P <0.01). In both DMM and MM groups, side effects including nausea / vomiting, diarrhea, chills and rigors, and fever occupants rred, and incidences of these side effects were no difference (P> 0.05). Conclusion DMM method would have similar clinical efficacies with MM method for early second-trimester pregnancy termination. Besides, DMM method has shorter induction-to-abortion interval and hospital stay, which benefits its clinical application.