15 research outputs found
Progestogens to prevent preterm birth in twin pregnancies: an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Preterm birth is the principal factor contributing to adverse outcomes in multiple pregnancies. Randomized controlled trials of progestogens to prevent preterm birth in twin pregnancies have shown no clear benefits. However, individual studies have not had sufficient power to evaluate potential benefits in women at particular high risk of early delivery (for example, women with a previous preterm birth or short cervix) or to determine adverse effects for rare outcomes such as intrauterine death.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>We propose an individual participant data meta-analysis of high quality randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of progestogen treatment in women with a twin pregnancy. The primary outcome will be adverse perinatal outcome (a composite measure of perinatal mortality and significant neonatal morbidity). Missing data will be imputed within each original study, before data of the individual studies are pooled. The effects of 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate or vaginal progesterone treatment in women with twin pregnancies will be estimated by means of a random effects log-binomial model. Analyses will be adjusted for variables used in stratified randomization as appropriate. Pre-specified subgroup analysis will be performed to explore the effect of progestogen treatment in high-risk groups.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Combining individual patient data from different randomized trials has potential to provide valuable, clinically useful information regarding the benefits and potential harms of progestogens in women with twin pregnancy overall and in relevant subgroups.</p
Recommended from our members
Repeat prenatal corticosteroid prior to preterm birth: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis for the PRECISE study group
The aim of this individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis is to assess whether the effects of repeat prenatal corticosteroid treatment given to women at risk of preterm birth to benefit their babies are modified in a clinically meaningful way by factors related to the women or the trial protocol. The Prenatal Repeat Corticosteroid International IPD Study Group: assessing the effects using the best level of Evidence (PRECISE) Group will conduct an IPD meta-analysis. The PRECISE International Collaborative Group was formed in 2010 and data collection commenced in 2011. Eleven trials with up to 5,000 women and 6,000 infants are eligible for the PRECISE IPD meta-analysis. The primary study outcomes for the infants will be serious neonatal outcome (defined by the PRECISE International IPD Study Group as one of death (foetal, neonatal or infant); severe respiratory disease; severe intraventricular haemorrhage (grade 3 and 4); chronic lung disease; necrotising enterocolitis; serious retinopathy of prematurity; and cystic periventricular leukomalacia); use of respiratory support (defined as mechanical ventilation or continuous positive airways pressure or other respiratory support); and birth weight (Z-scores). For the children, the primary study outcomes will be death or any neurological disability (however defined by trialists at childhood follow up and may include developmental delay or intellectual impairment (developmental quotient or intelligence quotient more than one standard deviation below the mean), cerebral palsy (abnormality of tone with motor dysfunction), blindness (for example, corrected visual acuity worse than 6/60 in the better eye) or deafness (for example, hearing loss requiring amplification or worse)). For the women, the primary outcome will be maternal sepsis (defined as chorioamnionitis; pyrexia after trial entry requiring the use of antibiotics; puerperal sepsis; intrapartum fever requiring the use of antibiotics; or postnatal pyrexia). Data analyses are expected to commence in 2011 with results publicly available in 2012
Recommended from our members
Cervical Pessary versus Expectant Management for the Prevention of Delivery Prior to 36 Weeks in Women with Placenta Previa: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Objective  This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared cervical pessary (CP) versus expectant management (EM) in women with placenta previa between 22.0 and 32.0 in prolonging gestation until ≥ 36.0 weeks gestation. Study Design  This study took place from November 2016 to June 2018. Women were randomized to receive either the Bioteque CP or EM. The pessary was removed at ≥ 36.0 weeks unless indicated. The primary outcome was gestational age (GA) at delivery, with secondary outcomes including need for transfusion, number and duration of antepartum admissions, type of delivery, and neonatal outcomes. A total of 140 patients were needed to show a 3-week prolongation of pregnancy in the pessary group; however, the trial was stopped early due to budgetary issues. Results  Of the 33 eligible women, 17 were enrolled. Although not statistically significant, the mean GA at delivery in the CP group was greater than women in the EM group (36.5 ± 1.23 vs. 36.0 ± 2.0; p  = 0.1673). The number and duration of antepartum admissions was greater in the EM group (2.7 ± 0.58 vs. 16.0 ± 22.76 days; p  = 0.1264) as well. Conclusion  Although the study was underpowered to determine the primary outcome, safety and feasibility of CP in pregnancies complicated with previa were demonstrated
Recommended from our members
A multicenter prospective study of neonatal outcomes at less than 32 weeks associated with indications for maternal admission and delivery.
BackgroundCounseling for patients with impending premature delivery traditionally has been based primarily on the projected gestational age at delivery. There are limited data regarding how the indications for the preterm birth affect the neonatal outcome and whether this issue should be taken into account in decisions regarding management and patient counseling.ObjectiveWe performed a prospective study of pregnancies resulting in premature delivery at less than 32 weeks to determine the influence of both the indications for admission and their associated indications for delivery on neonatal mortality and complications of prematurity.Study designThis is a multicenter, prospective study in 10 hospitals where all data from the neonatal intensive care unit routinely was imported to a deidentified data warehouse. Maternal data were collected prospectively at or near the time of delivery. Eligible subjects included singleton deliveries in these hospitals between 23 0/7 and 31 6/7 weeks. The primary hypothesis of the study was to determine whether there was a difference in the primary outcome, which was defined as neonatal composite morbidity, between those neonates delivered after admission for premature labor vs premature rupture of membranes, because these were expected to be the 2 most frequent diagnoses leading to premature birth. The sample size was calculated based on a 10% difference in outcomes for these 2 entities. We based this hypothesis on the knowledge that premature rupture of membranes has a greater incidence of intra-amniotic infection and inflammation than premature labor and that outcomes for premature neonates are worse when delivery is associated with intra-amniotic infection. Additional outcomes were analyzed for all other indications for admission and delivery. Composite morbidity was defined as ≥1 of the following: respiratory distress syndrome (oxygen requirement, clinical diagnosis, and consistent chest radiograph), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (requirement for oxygen support at 28 days of life), severe intraventricular hemorrhage (grades 3 or 4), periventricular leukomalacia, blood culture-proven sepsis present within 72 hours of birth, necrotizing enterocolitis, or neonatal death before discharge from the hospital. A secondary composite of serious neonatal morbidity also was defined prospectively.ResultsThe study included 1089 mother/baby pairs. Composite morbidity between those with premature labor (77.2%) and premature rupture of membranes (73.2%) was not significantly different (P = .29). A few neonatal complications were associated with indications for admission and delivery, but on logistic regression adjusting for gestational age and other confounders, suspected intrauterine growth restriction was the only indication for admission or delivery associated with an increase in serious morbidity (odds ratio 4.5, [2.1 to 9.8], P < .003). Other factors not related to the indications for admission including cesarean delivery, and low 5-minute Apgar were associated with an increase in morbidity.ConclusionStudies of many single factors related to the indications for preterm delivery have been shown to be associated with adverse neonatal outcome. In this study evaluating all of the most frequent indications, however, we found only suspected intrauterine growth restriction as an indication for admission and delivery was found to be so. Thus, it seems that in almost all situations counseling patients can be based primarily on gestational age along with other factors including estimated fetal weight, sex, race, plurality, and completion of a course of antenatal corticosteroids
Recommended from our members
Cervical Pessary versus Expectant Management for the Prevention of Delivery Prior to 36 Weeks in Women with Placenta Previa: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Objective  This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared cervical pessary (CP) versus expectant management (EM) in women with placenta previa between 22.0 and 32.0 in prolonging gestation until ≥ 36.0 weeks' gestation. Study Design  This study took place from November 2016 to June 2018. Women were randomized to receive either the Bioteque CP or EM. The pessary was removed at ≥ 36.0 weeks unless indicated. The primary outcome was gestational age (GA) at delivery, with secondary outcomes including need for transfusion, number and duration of antepartum admissions, type of delivery, and neonatal outcomes. A total of 140 patients were needed to show a 3-week prolongation of pregnancy in the pessary group; however, the trial was stopped early due to budgetary issues. Results  Of the 33 eligible women, 17 were enrolled. Although not statistically significant, the mean GA at delivery in the CP group was greater than women in the EM group (36.5 ± 1.23 vs. 36.0 ± 2.0; p  = 0.1673). The number and duration of antepartum admissions was greater in the EM group (2.7 ± 0.58 vs. 16.0 ± 22.76 days; p  = 0.1264) as well. Conclusion  Although the study was underpowered to determine the primary outcome, safety and feasibility of CP in pregnancies complicated with previa were demonstrated
Recommended from our members
A multicenter prospective study of neonatal outcomes at less than 32 weeks associated with indications for maternal admission and delivery.
BackgroundCounseling for patients with impending premature delivery traditionally has been based primarily on the projected gestational age at delivery. There are limited data regarding how the indications for the preterm birth affect the neonatal outcome and whether this issue should be taken into account in decisions regarding management and patient counseling.ObjectiveWe performed a prospective study of pregnancies resulting in premature delivery at less than 32 weeks to determine the influence of both the indications for admission and their associated indications for delivery on neonatal mortality and complications of prematurity.Study designThis is a multicenter, prospective study in 10 hospitals where all data from the neonatal intensive care unit routinely was imported to a deidentified data warehouse. Maternal data were collected prospectively at or near the time of delivery. Eligible subjects included singleton deliveries in these hospitals between 23 0/7 and 31 6/7 weeks. The primary hypothesis of the study was to determine whether there was a difference in the primary outcome, which was defined as neonatal composite morbidity, between those neonates delivered after admission for premature labor vs premature rupture of membranes, because these were expected to be the 2 most frequent diagnoses leading to premature birth. The sample size was calculated based on a 10% difference in outcomes for these 2 entities. We based this hypothesis on the knowledge that premature rupture of membranes has a greater incidence of intra-amniotic infection and inflammation than premature labor and that outcomes for premature neonates are worse when delivery is associated with intra-amniotic infection. Additional outcomes were analyzed for all other indications for admission and delivery. Composite morbidity was defined as ≥1 of the following: respiratory distress syndrome (oxygen requirement, clinical diagnosis, and consistent chest radiograph), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (requirement for oxygen support at 28 days of life), severe intraventricular hemorrhage (grades 3 or 4), periventricular leukomalacia, blood culture-proven sepsis present within 72 hours of birth, necrotizing enterocolitis, or neonatal death before discharge from the hospital. A secondary composite of serious neonatal morbidity also was defined prospectively.ResultsThe study included 1089 mother/baby pairs. Composite morbidity between those with premature labor (77.2%) and premature rupture of membranes (73.2%) was not significantly different (P = .29). A few neonatal complications were associated with indications for admission and delivery, but on logistic regression adjusting for gestational age and other confounders, suspected intrauterine growth restriction was the only indication for admission or delivery associated with an increase in serious morbidity (odds ratio 4.5, [2.1 to 9.8], P < .003). Other factors not related to the indications for admission including cesarean delivery, and low 5-minute Apgar were associated with an increase in morbidity.ConclusionStudies of many single factors related to the indications for preterm delivery have been shown to be associated with adverse neonatal outcome. In this study evaluating all of the most frequent indications, however, we found only suspected intrauterine growth restriction as an indication for admission and delivery was found to be so. Thus, it seems that in almost all situations counseling patients can be based primarily on gestational age along with other factors including estimated fetal weight, sex, race, plurality, and completion of a course of antenatal corticosteroids