Dataset Information

Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, the optimal time to initiate delivery is unclear because limitation of maternal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of neonatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia.

Methods

In this parallel-group, non-masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management (usual care) with individual randomisation in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia from 34 to less than 37 weeks' gestation and a singleton or dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy. The co-primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal morbidity or recorded systolic blood pressure of at least 160 mm Hg with a superiority hypothesis. The co-primary perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission up to infant hospital discharge with a non-inferiority hypothesis (non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in incidence). Analyses were by intention to treat, together with a per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN01879376. The trial is closed to recruitment but follow-up is ongoing.

Findings

Between Sept 29, 2014, and Dec 10, 2018, 901 women were recruited. 450 women (448 women and 471 infants analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants analysed) to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group (289 [65%] women) compared with the expectant management group (338 [75%] women; adjusted relative risk 0·86, 95% CI 0·79-0·94; p=0·0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was significantly higher in the planned delivery group (196 [42%] infants) compared with the expectant management group (159 [34%] infants; 1·26, 1·08-1·47; p=0·0034). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group.

Interpretation

There is strong evidence to suggest that planned delivery reduces maternal morbidity and severe hypertension compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater neonatal morbidity. This trade-off should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision making on timing of delivery.

Funding

National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

SUBMITTER: Chappell LC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6892281 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a pregnancy disorder, characterised by hypertension and multisystem complications in the mother. The adverse outcomes of pre-eclampsia include severe hypertension, stroke, renal and hepatic injury, haemorrhage, fetal growth restriction and even death. The optimal time to instigate delivery to prevent morbidity when pre-eclampsia occurs between 34 and 37?weeks' gestation, without increasing problems related to infant immaturity or complications, remains unclear.Methods/designThe PHOENIX trial is a non-masked, randomised controlled trial, comparing planned early delivery (with initiation of delivery within 48?h of randomisation) with usual care (expectant management) in women with pre-eclampsia between 34+?0 and 36+?6 weeks' gestation. The primary objectives of the trial are to determine if planned delivery reduces adverse maternal outcomes, without increasing the short-term harm to infants (composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admissions up to infant hospital discharge) or impacting long-term infant neurodevelopmental status at 2 years corrected age (Parent Report of Cognitive Abilities-Revised).DiscussionCurrent practice in the UK at the time of trial commencement for management of pre-eclampsia varies by gestation. Previous trials have shown that in women with pre-eclampsia after 37?weeks of gestion, delivery is initiated, as maternal complications are reduced without increasing fetal risks. Prior to 34?weeks of gestation, usual management aims to prolong pregnancy for fetal benefit, unless severe complications occur, necessitating preterm delivery. This trial aims to address the uncertainty for women where the balance of benefits and risks of delivery compared to expectant management are uncertain. Previous trials in this area have been undertaken, but have not provided a definitive answer, and the research question remains active. The results of this trial are expected to influence clinical practice internationally, through direct adoption and by incorporation into guidelines in countries with similar settings.Trial registrationISRCTN01879376 . Registered on 25 November 2013.

Project description:BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity globally. Planned delivery between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks may reduce adverse pregnancy outcomes but is yet to be evaluated in a low and middle-income setting. Prior to designing a randomised controlled trial to evaluate this in India and Zambia, we carried out a 6-month feasibility study in order to better understand the proposed trial environment and guide development of our intervention.MethodsWe used mixed methods to understand the disease burden and current management of pre-eclampsia at our proposed trial sites and explore the acceptability of the intervention. We undertook a case notes review of women with pre-eclampsia who delivered at the proposed trial sites over a 3-month period, alongside facilitating focus group discussions with women and partners and conducting semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse audit data. A thematic framework analysis was used for qualitative data.ResultsCase notes data (n = 326) showed that in our settings, 19.5% (n = 44) of women with pre-eclampsia delivering beyond 34 weeks experienced an adverse outcome. In women delivering between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks, there were similar numbers of antenatal stillbirths [n = 3 (3.3%)] and neonatal deaths [n = 3 (3.4%)]; median infant birthweight was 2.2 kg and 1.9 kg in Zambia and India respectively. Lived experience of women and healthcare providers was an important facilitator to the proposed intervention, highlighting the serious consequences of pre-eclampsia. A preference for spontaneous labour and limited neonatal resources were identified as potential barriers.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated a clear need to evaluate the intervention and highlighted several challenges relating to trial context that enabled us to adapt our protocol and design an acceptable intervention. Our study demonstrates the importance of assessing feasibility when developing complex interventions, particularly in a low-resource setting. Additionally, it provides a unique insight into the management of pre-eclampsia at our trial settings and an understanding of the knowledge, attitudes and beliefs underpinning the acceptability of planned early delivery.

Project description:BackgroundPre-eclampsia is a pregnancy complication characterised by high blood pressure and multi-organ dysfunction in the mother. It is a leading contributor to maternal and perinatal mortality, with 99% of these deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). Whilst clear guidelines exist for management of early-onset (< 34 weeks) and term (≥ 37 weeks) disease, the optimal timing of delivery in pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks is less clear. In a high-income setting, delivery may improve maternal outcomes without detriment to the baby, but this intervention is yet to be evaluated in LMIC.MethodsThe CRADLE-4 Trial is a non-masked, randomised controlled trial comparing planned early delivery (initiation of delivery within 48 h of randomisation) with routine care (expectant management) in women with pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks' gestation in India and Zambia. The primary objective is to establish whether a policy of planned early delivery can reduce adverse maternal outcomes, without increasing severe neonatal morbidity.DiscussionThe World Health Organization recommends delivery for all women with pre-eclampsia from 37 weeks onwards, based on evidence showing clear maternal benefit without increased neonatal risk. Before 34 weeks, watchful waiting is preferred, with delivery recommended only when there is severe maternal or fetal compromise, due to the neonatal risks associated with early preterm delivery. Currently, there is a lack of guidance for clinicians managing women with pre-eclampsia between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks. Early delivery benefits the mother but may increase the need for neonatal unit admission in the infant (albeit without serious morbidity at this gestation). On the other hand, waiting to deliver may increase the risk of stillbirth, fetal growth restriction and hypoxic brain injury in the neonate as a result of severe maternal complications. This is especially true for LMIC where there is a higher prevalence of adverse events. The balance of risks and benefits therefore needs to be carefully assessed before making firm recommendations. This is the first trial evaluating the optimal timing of delivery in pre-eclampsia in LMIC, where resources and disease burden are considerably different.Trial registrationISRCTN 10672137 . Registered on 28 November 2019.

Project description:IntroductionPre-eclampsia affects ~5%-7% of pregnancies. Although improved obstetric care has significantly diminished its associated maternal mortality, it remains a leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality in the world. Term pre-eclampsia accounts for 70% of all cases and a large proportion of maternal-fetal morbidity related to this condition. Unlike in preterm pre-eclampsia, the prediction and prevention of term pre-eclampsia remain unsolved. Previously proposed approaches are based on combined third-trimester screening and/or prophylactic drugs, but these policies are unlikely to be widely implementable in many world settings. Recent evidence shows that the soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (s-Flt-1) to placental growth factor (PlGF) ratio measured at 35-37 weeks' gestation predicts term pre-eclampsia with an 80% detection rate. Likewise, recent studies demonstrate that induction of labour beyond 37 weeks is safe and well accepted by women. We hypothesise that a single-step universal screening for term pre-eclampsia based on sFlt1/PlGF ratio at 35-37 weeks followed by planned delivery beyond 37 weeks reduces the prevalence of term pre-eclampsia without increasing the caesarean section rates or worsening the neonatal outcomes.Methods and analysisWe propose an open-label randomised clinical trial to evaluate the impact of a screening of term pre-eclampsia with the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio followed by planned delivery in asymptomatic nulliparous women at 35-37 weeks. Women will be assigned 1:1 to revealed (sFlt-1/PlGF known to clinicians) versus concealed (unknown) arms. A cut-off of >90th centile is used to define the high risk of subsequent pre-eclampsia and offer planned delivery from 37 weeks. The efficacy variables will be analysed and compared between groups primarily following an intention-to-treat approach, by ORs and their 95% CI. This value will be computed using a Generalised Linear Mixed Model for binary response (study group as fixed effect and the centre as intercept random effect).Ethics and disseminationThe study is conducted under the principles of Good Clinical Practice. This study was accepted by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Hospital Clinic Barcelona on 20 November 2020. Subsequent approval by individual ethical committees and competent authorities was granted. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at international conferences.Trial registration numberNCT04766866.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether extended release metformin could be used to prolong gestation in women being expectantly managed for preterm pre-eclampsia.DesignRandomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial.SettingReferral hospital in Cape Town, South Africa.Participants180 women with preterm pre-eclampsia between 26+0 to 31+6 weeks' gestation undergoing expectant management: 90 were randomised to extended release metformin and 90 to placebo.Intervention3 g of oral extended release metformin or placebo daily, in divided doses, until delivery.Main outcome measureThe primary outcome was prolongation of gestation.ResultsOf 180 participants, one woman delivered before taking any trial drug. The median time from randomisation to delivery was 17.7 days (interquartile range 5.4-29.4 days; n=89) in the metformin arm and 10.1 (3.7-24.1; n=90) days in the placebo arm, a median difference of 7.6 days (geometric mean ratio 1.39, 95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.95; P=0.057). Among those who continued to take the trial drug at any dose, the median prolongation of gestation in the metformin arm was 17.5 (interquartile range 5.4-28.7; n=76) days compared with 7.9 (3.0-22.2; n=74) days in the placebo arm, a median difference of 9.6 days (geometric mean ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1.16 to 2.42). Among those who took the full dosage, the median prolongation of gestation in the metformin arm was 16.3 (interquartile range 4.8-28.8; n=40) days compared with 4.8 (2.5-15.4; n=61) days in the placebo arm, a median difference of 11.5 days (geometric mean ratio 1.85, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 2.88). Composite maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes and circulating concentrations of soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1, placental growth factor, and soluble endoglin did not differ. In the metformin arm, birth weight increased non-significantly and length of stay decreased in the neonatal nursery. No serious adverse events related to trial drugs were observed, although diarrhoea was more common in the metformin arm.ConclusionsThis trial suggests that extended release metformin can prolong gestation in women with preterm pre-eclampsia, although further trials are needed. It provides proof of concept that treatment of preterm pre-eclampsia is possible.Trial registrationPan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR201608001752102 https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/.

Project description:BackgroundAn evidence-based strategy exists to reduce maternal morbidity and mortality associated with severe pre-eclampsia/eclampsia (PE/E), but it may be difficult to implement in low-resource settings. This study examines whether facilities that provide emergency obstetric and newborn care (EmONC) in Afghanistan have the capacity to manage severe PE/E cases.MethodsA further analysis was conducted of the 2009-10 Afghanistan EmONC Needs Assessment. Assessors observed equipment and supplies available, and services provided at 78 of the 127 facilities offering comprehensive EmONC services and interviewed 224 providers. The providers also completed a written case scenario on severe PE/E. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize facility and provider characteristics. Student t-test, one-way ANOVA, and chi-square tests were performed to determine whether there were significant differences between facility types, doctors and midwives, and trained and untrained providers.ResultsThe median number of severe PE/E cases in the past year was just 5 (range 0-42) at comprehensive health centers (CHCs) and district hospitals, compared with 44 (range 0-130) at provincial hospitals and 108 (range 32-540) at regional and specialized hospitals (p < 0.001). Most facilities had the drugs and supplies needed to treat severe PE/E, including the preferred anticonvulsant, magnesium sulfate (MgSO4). One-third of the smallest facilities and half of larger facilities reported administering a second-line drug, diazepam, in some cases. In the case scenario, 96% of doctors and 89% of midwives recognized that MgSO4 should be used to manage severe PE/E, but 42% of doctors and 58% of midwives also thought diazepam had a role to play. Providers who were trained on the use of MgSO4 scored significantly higher than untrained providers on six of 20 items in the case scenario. Providers at larger facilities significantly outscored those at smaller facilities on five items. There was a significant difference between doctors and midwives on only one item: continued use of anti-hypertensives after convulsions are controlled.ConclusionsDrugs and supplies needed to treat severe PE/E are widely available at EmONC facilities in Afghanistan, but providers lack knowledge in some areas, especially concerning the use of MgSO4 and diazepam. Providers who have specialized training or work at larger facilities are better at managing cases of severe PE/E. The findings suggest a need to clarify service delivery guidelines, offer refresher training, and reinforce best practices with supervision and reinforcement.

Project description:ObjectivesPreterm birth (PTB) is a major public health problem worldwide. It can occur spontaneously or be medically indicated for obstetric complications, such as pre-eclampsia (PE) or fetal growth restriction. The main objective of this study was to investigate whether there is a shared uteroplacental etiology in the first trimester of pregnancy across PTB subtypes.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of singleton pregnancies that underwent screening for preterm PE as part of their routine first-trimester ultrasound assessment at a tertiary center in London, UK, between March 2018 and December 2020. Screening for preterm PE was performed using the Fetal Medicine Foundation algorithm, which includes maternal factors, mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A). Women with a risk of ≥ 1 in 50 for preterm PE were classified as high risk and offered prophylactic aspirin (150 mg once a day) and serial ultrasound assessments. The following delivery outcomes were evaluated: PTB < 37 weeks, iatrogenic PTB (iPTB) and spontaneous PTB (sPTB). Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the association of PTB, iPTB and sPTB with an increased risk of preterm PE. A model for prediction of PTB < 37 weeks and < 33 weeks was developed and its performance was compared with that of an existing model in the literature.ResultsA total of 11 437 women were included in the study, of whom 475 (4.2%) had PTB. Of these, 308 (64.8%) were sPTB and 167 (35.2%) were iPTB. Patients with PTB had a higher body mass index, were more likely to be of black or Asian ethnicity, be smokers, have pregestational hypertension or diabetes, or have a history of previous PTB. They also had higher MAP (87.7 vs 86.0 mmHg, P < 0.0001), higher UtA-PI multiples of the median (MoM) (0.99 vs 0.92, P < 0.0001) and lower PAPP-A MoM (0.89 vs 1.08, P < 0.0001) compared to women with a term birth. In women at high risk of PE, the odds ratio for iPTB was 6.0 (95% CI, 4.29-8.43; P < 0.0001) and that for sPTB was 2.0 (95% CI, 1.46-2.86; P < 0.0001). A prediction model for PTB < 37 weeks and < 33 weeks, developed based on this cohort, included previous PTB, black ethnicity, chronic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, PAPP-A MoM and UtA-PI MoM. The performance of the model was similar to that of an existing first-trimester prediction model for PTB < 33 weeks (area under the curve, 0.704 (95% CI, 0.653-0.754) vs 0.694 (95% CI, 0.643-0.746)).ConclusionsIncreased first-trimester risk for uteroplacental dysfunction was associated with both iPTB and sPTB, implying a shared etiological pathway. The same factors used to predict PE risk show acceptable discrimination to predict PTB at < 33 weeks. Women at high risk of uteroplacental dysfunction may warrant additional monitoring and management for an increased risk of sPTB. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.