Dataset Information

Effectiveness of combined vaginal progesterone and cervical cerclage in preventing preterm birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Preterm birth (PTB) is the leading cause of death in children under 5 years. Preventive therapies targeted towards women with risk factors such as a prior PTB or a short cervix reduce the rate of PTB. Cervical cerclage, vaginal progesterone and a combination of the two have been used with no consensus as to whether combined treatment is more effective than any single treatment alone. The objective of this review is to determine the efficacy of combined treatment compared with cerclage alone and combined treatment compared with progesterone alone.

Methods and analysis

Studies will be sourced from the electronic databases Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL (EBSCOhost) and Cochrane Library (Wiley) and reference lists. We will not exclude any papers due to publication date. Randomised control trials (RCTs), non-RCTs and cohort studies assessing single therapy (either progesterone or cerclage) versus combined therapy in women with a singleton pregnancy will be included. Two independent reviewers will conduct study screening (at abstract and full-text level), data extraction and risk of bias assessment with disagreements resolved by an experienced researcher. Random or fixed effects models will be used depending on data heterogeneity and data will be presented as risk ratio for dichotomous data or mean difference for continuous data with a CI of 95% used for all outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination

Not applicable due to nature of the study type.

Prospero registration number

CRD42020195975.

SUBMITTER: Diacci RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8237739 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionWomen with twin pregnancies and a short cervix are at increased risk for preterm birth (PTB). Given the burden of prematurity and its attendant risks, the quest for effective interventions in twins has been an area of considerable research. Studies investigating the effectiveness of cervical cerclage, cervical pessary and vaginal progesterone in preventing PTB have yielded conflicting results. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of cervical pessary and cervical cerclage with or without vaginal progesterone to prevent PTB in women with twin pregnancies and a cervical length (CL) ≤ 28 mm.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, randomised clinical trial will be conducted at My Duc Hospital and My Duc Phu Nhuan Hospital, Vietnam. Asymptomatic women with twin pregnancies and a CL ≤28 mm, measured at 16-22 weeks' gestation, will be randomised in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive a cerclage, pessary, cerclage plus progesterone or pessary plus progesterone. Primary outcome will be PTB <34 weeks. Secondary outcomes will be maternal and neonatal complications. We preplanned a subgroup analysis according to CL from all women after randomisation and divided into four quartiles. Analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The rate of PTB <34 weeks' gestation in women with twin pregnancies and a cervix ≤28 mm and treated with pessary in our previous study at My Duc Hospital was 24.2%. A sample size of 340 women will be required to show or refute that cervical cerclage decreases the rate of PTB <34 weeks by 50% compared with pessary (from 24.2% to 12.1%, α level 0.05, power 80%, 5% lost to follow-up and protocol deviation). This study is not to be powered to assess interactions between interventions.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of My Duc Hospital and informed patient consent was obtained before study enrolment. Results of the study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT03863613 (date of registration: 4 March 2019).

Project description:BackgroundPreterm birth is a major health problem and contributes to more than 50% of the overall perinatal mortality. Preterm birth has multiple risk factors including cervical incompetence and multiple pregnancy. Different management strategies have been tried to prevent preterm birth, including cervical cerclage. Cervical cerclage is an invasive technique that needs anaesthesia and may be associated with complications. Moreover, there is still controversy regarding the efficacy and the group of patients that could benefit from this operation. Cervical pessary has been tried as a simple, non-invasive alternative that might replace the above invasive cervical stitch operation to prevent preterm birth.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy of cervical pessary for the prevention of preterm birth in women with risk factors for cervical incompetence.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 September 2012), Current Controlled Trials and the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (1 September 2012).Selection criteriaWe selected all published and unpublished randomised clinical trials comparing the use of cervical pessary with cervical cerclage or expectant management for prevention of preterm birth. We did not include quasi-randomised trials. Cluster-randomised or cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion.Main resultsThe review included one randomised controlled trial. The study included 385 pregnant women with a short cervix of 25 mm or less who were between 18 to 22 weeks of pregnancy. The use of cervical pessary (192 women) was associated with a statistically significantly decrease in the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation compared with expectant management (22% versus 59 %; respectively, risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.49). Spontaneous preterm birth before 34 weeks was statistically significantly reduced in the pessary group (6% and 27% respectively, RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.43). Mean gestational age at delivery was 37.7 + 2 weeks in the pessary group and 34.9 + 4 weeks in the expectant group. Women in the pessary group used less tocolytics (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.81) and corticosteroids (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.81) than the expectant group. Vaginal discharge was more common in the pessary group (RR 2.18; 95% CI 1.87 to 2.54). Among the pessary group, 27 women needed pessary repositioning without removal and there was one case of pessary removal. Ninety-five per cent of women in the pessary group would recommend this intervention to other people. Neonatal paediatric care admission was reduced in the pessary group in comparison to the expectant group (RR 0.17; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.42).Authors' conclusionsThe review included only one well-designed randomised clinical trial that showed beneficial effect of cervical pessary in reducing preterm birth in women with a short cervix. There is a need for more trials in different settings (developed and developing countries), and with different risk factors including multiple pregnancy.

Project description:Clinically, once a woman has been identified as being at risk of spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) due to a short cervical length, a decision regarding prophylactic treatment must be made. Three interventions have the potential to improve outcomes: cervical cerclage (stitch), vaginal progesterone and cervical pessary. Each has been shown to have similar benefit in reduction of sPTB, but there have been no randomised control trials (RCTs) to compare them.This open label multi-centre UK RCT trial, will evaluate whether the three interventions are equally efficacious to prevent premature birth in women who develop a short cervix (<25 mm on transvaginal ultrasound). Participants will be asymptomatic and between 14+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation in singleton pregnancies. Eligible women will be randomised to cervical cerclage, Arabin pessary or vaginal progesterone (200 mg once daily) (n?=?170 women per group). The obstetric endpoints are premature birth rate <37 weeks' of gestation (primary), 34 weeks and 30 weeks (secondary outcomes) and short-term neonatal outcomes (a composite of death and major morbidity). It will also explore whether intervention success can be predicted by pre-intervention biomarker status.Preterm birth is the leading cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality and a short cervix is a useful way of identifying those most at risk. However, best management of these women has presented a clinical conundrum for decades. Given the promise offered by cerclage, Arabin pessary and vaginal progesterone for prevention of preterm birth in individual trials, direct comparison of these prophylactic interventions is now essential to establish whether one treatment is superior. If, as we hypothesise, the three interventions are equally efficacious, this study will empower women to make a choice of treatments based on personal preference and quality of life issues also explored by the study. Our exploratory analysis into whether the response to intervention is related to the pre-intervention biomarker status further our understanding of the pathophysiology of spontaneous preterm birth and help focus future research questions.EudraCT Number: 2015-000456-15 . Registered 11th March 2015.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the effect of intramuscular progesterone on the vaginal immune response of pregnant women with a history of prior preterm birth.MethodsA prospective, cohort study of women at 11-16 weeks gestation, ?18 years of age, and carrying a singleton pregnancy was conducted from June 2016 to August 2017 after IRB approval. Women in the progesterone arm had a history of preterm birth and received weekly intramuscular 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. Controls comprised of women with healthy, uncomplicated pregnancies. Excluded were women with vaginitis, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or other chronic diseases affecting the immune response. A vaginal wash was performed at enrollment, at 26-28 weeks, and at 35-36 weeks gestation. Samples underwent semi-quantitative detection of human inflammatory markers. Immunofluorescence pixel density data was analyzed and a P value <0.05 was considered significant.ResultsThere were 39 women included, 10 with a prior preterm birth and 29 controls. The baseline demographics and pregnancy outcomes for both groups were similar in age, parity, race, BMI, gestational age at delivery, mode of delivery, and birth weight. Enrollment cytokines in women with a prior preterm birth, including IL-1 alpha (39.2±25.1% versus 26.1±13.2%; P = 0.04), IL-1 beta (47.9±26.4% versus 24.9±17%; P<0.01), IL-2 (16.7±9.3% versus 11.3±6.3%; P = 0.03), and IL-13 (16.9±12.4% versus 8.2±7.4%; P = 0.01) were significantly elevated compared to controls. In the third trimester the cytokine densities for IL-1 alpha (26.0±18.2% versus 22.3±12.0%; P = 0.49), IL-1 beta (31.8±15.9% versus 33.1±16.8%; P = 0.84), IL-2 (10.0±8.4% versus 10.9±5.9%; P = 0.71), and IL-13 (9.1±5.9% versus 10.0±6.5%; P = 0.71) were all statistically similar between the progesterone arm and controls, respectively.ConclusionThere is an increased cytokine presence in vaginal washings of women at risk for preterm birth which appears to be modified following the administration of 17- hydroxyprogesterone caproate to levels similar to healthy controls.

Project description:BackgroundProgesterone administration has been shown to reduce the risk of preterm birth and neonatal morbidity in women at high risk, but there is uncertainty about longer term effects on the child.MethodsWe did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial of vaginal progesterone, 200 mg daily taken from 22-24 to 34 weeks of gestation, on pregnancy and infant outcomes in women at risk of preterm birth (because of previous spontaneous birth at ≤34 weeks and 0 days of gestation, or a cervical length ≤25 mm, or because of a positive fetal fibronectin test combined with other clinical risk factors for preterm birth [any one of a history in a previous pregnancy of preterm birth, second trimester loss, preterm premature fetal membrane rupture, or a history of a cervical procedure to treat abnormal smears]). The objective of the study was to determine whether vaginal progesterone prophylaxis given to reduce the risk of preterm birth affects neonatal and childhood outcomes. We defined three primary outcomes: fetal death or birth before 34 weeks and 0 days gestation (obstetric), a composite of death, brain injury, or bronchopulmonary dysplasia (neonatal), and a standardised cognitive score at 2 years of age (childhood), imputing values for deaths. Randomisation was done through a web portal, with participants, investigators, and others involved in giving the intervention, assessing outcomes, or analysing data masked to treatment allocation until the end of the study. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ISRCTN.com, number ISRCTN14568373.FindingsBetween Feb 2, 2009, and April 12, 2013, we randomly assigned 1228 women to the placebo group (n=610) and the progesterone group (n=618). In the placebo group, data from 597, 587, and 439 women or babies were available for analysis of obstetric, neonatal, and childhood outcomes, respectively; in the progesterone group the corresponding numbers were 600, 589, and 430. After correction for multiple outcomes, progesterone had no significant effect on the primary obstetric outcome (odds ratio adjusted for multiple comparisons [OR] 0·86, 95% CI 0·61-1·22) or neonatal outcome (OR 0·62, 0·38-1·03), nor on the childhood outcome (cognitive score, progesterone group vs placebo group, 97·3 [SD 17·9] vs 97·7 [17·5]; difference in means -0·48, 95% CI -2·77 to 1·81). Maternal or child serious adverse events were reported in 70 (11%) of 610 patients in the placebo group and 59 (10%) of 616 patients in the progesterone group (p=0·27).InterpretationVaginal progesterone was not associated with reduced risk of preterm birth or composite neonatal adverse outcomes, and had no long-term benefit or harm on outcomes in children at 2 years of age.FundingEfficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Programme, a Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership. The EME Programme is funded by the MRC and NIHR, with contributions from the Chief Scientist Office in Scotland and National Institute for Social Care and Research in Wales.