Misoprostol to treat postpartum haemorrhage: a systematic review

Misoprostol versus oxytocin for the reduction of postpartum blood loss

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of 400 mug of oral misoprostol with 5 U of intravenous oxytocin in the reduction of postpartum blood loss and prevention of postpartum hemorrhage.

METHODS

In a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial conducted in a tertiary maternity hospital 622 women received either 400 mug of oral misoprostol or 5 U of intravenous oxytocin after delivery of the anterior shoulder or within 1 min of delivery. The primary outcome was a hematocrit drop of 10% or greater 24 h postpartum. The secondary outcomes were a hemoglobin drop of 30 mg/L or greater, the use of additional oxytocin, an estimated blood loss greater than 1000 mL, manual removal of the placenta, a blood transfusion, and shivering and fever (>or=38 degrees C) as adverse effects of misoprostol.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the 2 groups regarding the primary outcome (a >or=10% hematocrit drop occurred in 3.4% and 3.7% of the participants in the oxytocin and misoprostol groups, P=0.98). The rate of use of additional oxytocin was higher in the misoprostol group (51% versus 40.5%, P=0.01). Shivering was confined to the misoprostol group (6.8%), and fever occurred in 12.5% of the women in the misoprostol group and 0.3% of the women in the oxytocin group.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of 400 microg of oral misoprostol was no less effective than 5 U of intravenous oxytocin in reducing blood loss after delivery, as assessed by change in postpartum hematocrit. The adverse effects of misoprostol were mild and self-limiting.

Treatment for primary postpartum haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Primary postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is one of the top five causes of maternal mortality in both developed and developing countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological, surgical and radiological interventions used for the treatment of primary PPH.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological, surgical techniques and radiological interventions for the treatment of PPH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed studies for eligibility and quality, and extracted data, independently. We contacted authors of the included studies for more information.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies (462 participants) were included. Two placebo-controlled randomised trials compared misoprostol (dose 600 to 1000 mcg) with placebo and showed that misoprostol use was not associated with any significant reduction of maternal mortality (two trials, 398 women; relative risk (RR) 7.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 138.6), hysterectomy (two trials, 398 women; RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.04 to 40.78), the additional use of uterotonics (two trials, 398 women; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.24), blood transfusion (two trials, 394 women; RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.18), or evacuation of retained products (one trial, 238 women; RR 5.17, 95% CI 0.25 to 107). Misoprostol use was associated with a significant increase of maternal pyrexia (two trials, 392 women; RR 6.40, 95% CI 1.71 to 23.96) and shivering (two trials, 394 women; RR 2.31, 95% CI 1.68 to 3.18). One unblinded trial showed better clinical response to rectal misoprostol compared with a combination of syntometrine and oxytocin. We did not identify any trial dealing with surgical techniques, radiological interventions or haemostatic drugs for women with primary PPH unresponsive to uterotonics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to show that the addition of misoprostol is superior to the combination of oxytocin and ergometrine alone for the treatment of primary PPH. Large multi-centre, double-blind, randomised controlled trials are required to identify the best drug combinations, route, and dose of uterotonics for the treatment of primary PPH. Further work is required to assess the best way of managing women who fail to respond to uterotonics therapy.

Misoprostol and active management of the third stage of labor

OBJECTIVE

To compare current practices for the active management of the third stage of labor (AMTSL) with the use of 600 mug of oral misoprostol.

METHODS

An operations research study was designed to compare blood loss with current AMTSL practices and misoprostol use.

RESULTS

Women in the misoprostol group were less likely to bleed 500 ml or more (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.56) compared with those in the current practices group. In the current practices group 73% women required interventions because of postpartum hemorrhage, compared with 11% in the misoprostol group.

CONCLUSION

In situations where oxytocin and or ergometrine are not consistently and appropriately used during third stage of labor, misoprostol should be considered for inclusion in the AMTSL protocol.

Misoprostol in preventing postpartum hemorrhage: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess misoprostol's ability to prevent postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) where no alternatives exist. Comparison to oxytocics demonstrates how similarly misoprostol achieves a level of effectiveness-obtainable only in hospitals-in remote locations around the world.

METHOD

Using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model and the DerSirmonian and Laird random-effects model, summary statistics indicated that misoprostol's excess risk of PPH was only 4% when compared to oxytocics.

RESULT

This risk difference was well within the range of expected results for all uterotonic agents and does not warrant branding misoprostol as an inferior drug.

CONCLUSION

Conventional uterotonic drugs should not be used to set the lowest-accepted level of effectiveness in settings where they are entirely unsuitable. Continuing to weigh the benefits of one effective drug against another only delays the distribution of misoprostol in countries where it is the only feasible choice and must be measured against no treatment at all.