A randomized controlled trial of sublingual Misoprostol - 600µg versus intravenous Oxytocin - 10IU in prevention of post partum hemorrhage during cesarean section

Background: Mortality related to pregnancy and childbirth causes half a million women around the world to die annually. About 35% of these deaths are from postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). Prevention of PPH has been advised by the WHO by the use of Oxytocin 10 IU IM or IV and Misoprostol 600 µg in low resource settings in vaginal delivery. However there have been only a few reports on the use of Misoprostol during cesarean section. The best route and dose of Misoprostol is still being debated.Methods: One hundred women with term singleton pregnancy undergoing elective or emergency cesarean section under spinal anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive either Misoprostol 600µg sublingually or intravenous oxytocin 10 IU soon after delivery of the baby. Estimated blood loss and comparative change in preoperative hemoglobin to post operative hemoglobin levels and side effects were evaluated.Results: Blood loss was found to be more in Misoprostol than Oxytocin. Eight patients of the Misoprostol group required additional oxytocics. Oxytocin group did not receive any additional drugs. No surgical intervention was made in either of the groups.  The most common side effect with Misoprostol was shivering (46%) and in Oxytocin group fever (4%).Conclusions: Sublingual Misoprostol of 600µg works to prevent postpartum bleeding. In our study Oxytocin was more effective than Misoprostol in preventing PPH during cesarean section. Late onset of action of Misoprostol in comparison to Oxytocin may render suturing of the uterus difficult due to pooling of blood. In settings in which use of Oxytocin is not feasible, Misoprostol might be a suitable alternative for post-partum hemorrhage

Effects of cigarette smoke on degranulation and NO production by mast cells and epithelial cells

Exhaled nitric oxide (eNO) is decreased by cigarette smoking. The hypothesis that oxides of nitrogen (NO(X)) in cigarette smoke solution (CSS) may exert a negative feedback mechanism upon NO release from epithelial (AEC, A549, and NHTBE) and basophilic cells (RBL-2H3) was tested in vitro. CSS inhibited both NO production and degranulation (measured as release of beta-hexosaminidase) in a dose-dependent manner from RBL-2H3 cells. Inhibition of NO production by CSS in AEC, A549, and NHTBE cells was also dose-dependent. In addition, CSS decreased expression of NOS mRNA and protein expression. The addition of NO inhibitors and scavengers did not, however, reverse the effects of CSS, nor did a NO donor (SNP) or nicotine mimic CSS. N-acetyl-cysteine, partially reversed the inhibition of beta-hexosaminidase release suggesting CSS may act via oxidative free radicals. Thus, some of the inhibitory effects of CSS appear to be via oxidative free radicals rather than a NO(X )-related negative feedback

Planned delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia in low-income and middle-income countries (CRADLE-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial

Background: Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality. Evidence regarding interventions in a low-income or middle-income setting is scarce. We aimed to evaluate whether planned delivery between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks’ gestation can reduce maternal mortality and morbidity without increasing perinatal complications in India and Zambia. / Methods: In this parallel-group, multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management in women with pre-eclampsia from 34+ 0 to 36+ 6 weeks’ gestation. Participants were recruited from nine hospitals and referral facilities in India and Zambia and randomly assigned to planned delivery or expectant management in a 1:1 ratio by a secure web-based randomisation facility hosted by MedSciNet. Randomisation was stratified by centre and minimised by parity, single-fetus pregnancy or multi-fetal pregnancy, and gestational age. The primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal mortality or morbidity with a superiority hypothesis. The primary perinatal outcome was a composite of one or more of: stillbirth, neonatal death, or neonatal unit admission of more than 48 h with a non-inferiority hypothesis (margin of 10% difference). Analyses were by intention to treat, with an additional per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, 10672137. The trial is closed to recruitment and all follow-up has been completed. / Findings: Between Dec 19, 2019, and March 31, 2022, 565 women were enrolled. 284 women (282 women and 301 babies analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 281 women (280 women and 300 babies analysed) were allocated to expectant management. The incidence of the primary maternal outcome was not significantly different in the planned delivery group (154 [55%]) compared with the expectant management group (168 [60%]; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·91, 95% CI 0·79 to 1·05). The incidence of the primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was non-inferior in the planned delivery group (58 [19%]) compared with the expectant management group (67 [22%]; adjusted risk difference –3·39%, 90% CI –8·67 to 1·90; non-inferiority p<0·0001). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There was a significant reduction in severe maternal hypertension (adjusted RR 0·83, 95% CI 0·70 to 0·99) and stillbirth (0·25, 0·07 to 0·87) associated with planned delivery. There were 12 serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 21 in the expectant management group. / Interpretation: Clinicians can safely offer planned delivery to women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, in a low-income or middle-income country. Planned delivery reduces stillbirth, with no increase in neonatal unit admissions or neonatal morbidity and reduces the risk of severe maternal hypertension. Planned delivery from 34 weeks’ gestation should therefore be considered as an intervention to reduce pre-eclampsia associated mortality and morbidity in these settings. / Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Indian Department of Biotechnology

Antenatal dexamethasone for early preterm birth in low-resource countries

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of antenatal glucocorticoids in women in low-resource countries who are at risk for preterm birth are uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a multicountry, randomized trial involving pregnant women between 26 weeks 0 days and 33 weeks 6 days of gestation who were at risk for preterm birth. The participants were assigned to intramuscular dexamethasone or identical placebo. The primary outcomes were neonatal death alone, stillbirth or neonatal death, and possible maternal bacterial infection; neonatal death alone and stillbirth or neonatal death were evaluated with superiority analyses, and possible maternal bacterial infection was evaluated with a noninferiority analysis with the use of a prespecified margin of 1.25 on the relative scale. RESULTS: A total of 2852 women (and their 3070 fetuses) from 29 secondary- and tertiary-level hospitals across Bangladesh, India, Kenya, Nigeria, and Pakistan underwent randomization. The trial was stopped for benefit at the second interim analysis. Neonatal death occurred in 278 of 1417 infants (19.6%) in the dexamethasone group and in 331 of 1406 infants (23.5%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.97; P=0.03). Stillbirth or neonatal death occurred in 393 of 1532 fetuses and infants (25.7%) and in 444 of 1519 fetuses and infants (29.2%), respectively (relative risk, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.99; P=0.04); the incidence of possible maternal bacterial infection was 4.8% and 6.3%, respectively (relative risk, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.03). There was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among women in low-resource countries who were at risk for early preterm birth, the use of dexamethasone resulted in significantly lower risks of neonatal death alone and stillbirth or neonatal death than the use of placebo, without an increase in the incidence of possible maternal bacterial infection.Fil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Vogel, Joshua P.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Piaggio, Gilda. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Nguyen, My-Huong. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Althabe, Fernando. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Metin Gülmezoglu, A.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Bahl, Rajiv. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Rao, Suman P.N.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: de Costa, Ayesha. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Gupta, Shuchita. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Shahidullah, Mohammod. No especifíca;Fil: Chowdhury, Saleha B.. No especifíca;Fil: Ara, Gulshan. No especifíca;Fil: Akter, Shaheen. No especifíca;Fil: Akhter, Nasreen. No especifíca;Fil: Dey, Probhat R.. No especifíca;Fil: Abdus Sabur, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Azad, Mohammad T.. No especifíca;Fil: Choudhury, Shahana F.. No especifíca;Fil: Matin, M.A.. No especifíca;Fil: Goudar, Shivaprasad S.. No especifíca;Fil: Dhaded, Sangappa M.. No especifíca;Fil: Metgud, Mrityunjay C.. No especifíca;Fil: Pujar, Yeshita V.. No especifíca;Fil: Somannavar, Manjunath S.. No especifíca;Fil: Vernekar, Sunil S.. No especifíca;Fil: Herekar, Veena R.. No especifíca;Fil: Bidri, Shailaja R.. No especifíca;Fil: Mathapati, Sangamesh S.. No especifíca;Fil: Patil, Preeti G.. No especifíca;Fil: Patil, Mallanagouda M.. No especifíca;Fil: Gudadinni, Muttappa R.. No especifíca;Fil: Bijapure, Hidaytullah R.. No especifíca;Fil: Mallapur, Ashalata A.. No especifíca;Fil: Katageri, Geetanjali M.. No especifíca;Fil: Chikkamath, Sumangala B.. No especifíca;Fil: Yelamali, Bhuvaneshwari C.. No especifíca;Fil: Pol, Ramesh R.. No especifíca;Fil: Misra, Sujata S.. No especifíca;Fil: Das, Leena. No especifíca

Misoprostol for primary versus secondary prevention of postpartum haemorrhage: A cluster-randomised non-inferiority community trial

© 2015 RCOG. Objective: To assess whether secondary prevention, which preemptively treats women with above-average postpartum bleeding, is non-inferior to universal prophylaxis. Design: A cluster-randomised non-inferiority community trial. Setting: Healt

Misoprostol for primary versus secondary prevention of postpartum haemorrhage: a cluster‐randomised non‐inferiority community trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether secondary prevention, which preemptively treats women with above‐average postpartum bleeding, is non‐inferior to universal prophylaxis. DESIGN: A cluster‐randomised non‐inferiority community trial. SETTING: Health sub‐centres and home deliveries in the Bijapur district of Karnataka, India. POPULATION: Women with low‐risk pregnancies who were eligible for delivery with an Auxiliary Nurse Midwife at home or sub‐centre and who consented to be part of the study. METHODS: Auxiliary Nurse Midwifes were randomised to secondary prevention using 800 mcg sublingual misoprostol administered to women with postpartum blood loss ≥350 ml or to universal prophylaxis using 600 mcg oral misoprostol administered to all women during the third stage of labour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postpartum haemoglobin ≤7.8 g/dl, mean postpartum blood loss and postpartum haemoglobin, postpartum haemorrhage rate, transfer to higher‐level facilities, acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. RESULTS: Misoprostol was administered to 99.7% of women as primary prevention. In secondary prevention, 92 (4.7%) women had postpartum bleeding ≥350 ml, of which 90 (97.8%) received misoprostol. The proportion of women with postpartum haemoglobin ≤7.8 g/dl was 5.9 and 8.8% in secondary and primary prevention clusters, respectively [difference −2.9%, one‐sided 95% confidence interval (CI) <1.3%]. Postpartum transfer and haemorrhage rates were low (<1%) in both groups. Shivering was more common in primary prevention clusters (P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Secondary prevention of postpartum haemorrhage with misoprostol is non‐inferior to universal prophylaxis based on the primary outcome of postpartum haemoglobin. Secondary prevention could be a good alternative to universal prophylaxis as it medicates fewer women and is an acceptable and feasible strategy at the community level. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Secondary prevention of postpartum haemorrhage with misoprostol is non‐inferior to universal prophylaxis