Combined insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1/interleukin-6 (Premaquick) versus fetal fibronectin for predicting preterm delivery among women with preterm contractions

Comparison of urine protein-creatinine ratio and urine dipstick test for significant proteinuria in preeclamptic women

Background

Assessing for significant proteinuria in pregnancy (SPIP) stands as a key indicator for diagnosing preeclampsia. However, the initial method typically employed for this assessment, the urine dipstick test, often yields inaccurate results. While a 24-h urine collection is considered the most reliable test, its implementation can lead to delays in diagnosis, potentially affecting both maternal and fetal well-being. The urine protein-creatinine (P/Cr) ratio can be used as an alternative to 24-h urine protein analysis, but its diagnostic accuracy has remained uncertain. There is a need to compare the diagnostic accuracy of urine P/Cr ratio and dipstick urinalysis for SPIP, especially in resource-poor settings.

Objectives

To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of urine P/Cr ratio and dipstick urinalysis in a spot urine specimen for the diagnosis of SPIP among women evaluated for preeclampsia using 24-h urine protein excretions as a gold standard.

Design

This is a comparative cross-sectional study.

Methods

The study involved 82 singleton pregnant women evaluated for preeclampsia from 20 weeks of gestation who underwent dipstick and P/Cr ratio tests in the same urine sample. Women at risk of preeclampsia were given a specimen container for the collection of urine samples on an outpatient basis. Participants were trained and told to collect the urine sample 24 h prior to their next antenatal appointment. However, those on admission and evaluated for preeclampsia had their 24-h urine collected in the hospital. The outcome measures included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, likelihood ratio and accuracy for the two tests. Significant proteinuria was defined as a P/Cr ratio >0.27 or ⩾2+ of proteinuria on the dipstick test. Preeclampsia was confirmed in women with both high blood pressure and SPIP.

Results

The mean age of participants was 28.65 ± 5.76 years. Comparatively, the diagnostic accuracy (91.46% (95% CI = 83.29-96.59) vs 59.76% (95% CI = 48.34-70.44), p = 0.001), sensitivity (94.74% vs 70.00%, p = 0.021), specificity (84.00% vs 43.75%, p = 0.001), negative predictive value (87.50% vs 48.28%, p = 0.003) and positive predictive value (93.10% vs 66.04%, p = 0.001), respectively, were higher for the spot urine P/Cr ratio than dipstick test. In addition, the positive likelihood ratio and the negative likelihood ratio for spot urine P/Cr ratio versus dipstick test were (1.93 vs 1.24) and (0.07 vs 0.69), respectively.

Conclusion

The spot urine P/Cr has superior diagnostic accuracy in the determination of significant proteinuria in pregnant women being evaluated for preeclampsia than the widely used dipstick test. A more robust multicenter study is needed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of spot urine PCR with the standard 24-h urine protein in low-income settings.

Benefits of Premaquick® Combined Detection of IL-6/Total IGFBP-1/Native IGFBP-1 to Predict Preterm Delivery

We conducted a prospective double-blind study to compare two vaginal diagnostic methods in singleton pregnancies with threatened preterm labor (TPL) at the University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand (France) from August 2018 to December 2020. Our main objective was to compare the diagnostic capacity at admission, in terms of positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), of Premaquick® (combined detection of IL-6/total IGFBP-1/native IGFBP-1) and QuikCheck fFN™ (fetal fibronectin) for delivery within 7 days in cases of TPL. We included 193 patients. Premaquick® had a sensitivity close to 89%, equivalent to QuikCheck fFN™, but a higher statistical specificity of 49.5% against 38.6% for QuikCheck fFN™. We found no superiority of Premaquick® over QuickCheck fFN™ in terms of PPV (6.6% vs. 7.9%), with NPV being equivalent in predicting childbirth within 7 days in cases of TPL (98.6% vs. 98.9%). Nevertheless, the combination of positive native and total IGFBP-1 and the combination of all three positive markers were associated with a higher PPV. Our results, though non-significant, support this combined multiple-biomarker approach to improve testing in terms of predictive values.

A randomized clinical trial of Premaquick biomarkers versus transvaginal cervical length for pre-induction cervical assessment at term among pregnant women

Objectives

To compare Premaquick biomarkers (combined insulin-like growth-factor binding protein 1 and interleukin-6) and cervical length measurement via transvaginal ultrasound for pre-induction cervical evaluation at term among pregnant women.

Methods

A randomized clinical trial of consenting pregnant women at the Nnamdi Azikiwe University Teaching Hospital, Nnewi, Nigeria. The women were randomized equally into Premaquick group (n = 36) and transvaginal ultrasound group (n = 36). The cervix was adjudged 'ripe' if the Premaquick test was positive or if the trans-vaginal measured cervical length was less than 28 mm. The primary outcome measures were the proportions of women who needed prostaglandin analogue for cervical ripening and the proportion that achieved vaginal delivery after induction of labour. The trial was registered in Pan African clinical trial registry (PACTR) registry with approval number PACTR202001579275333.

Results

The baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of proportion of women that required prostaglandins for pre-induction cervical ripening (41.7 versus 47.2%, p = 0.427), vaginal delivery (77.8 versus 80.6%, p = 0.783), mean induction to delivery interval (22.9 ± 2.81 h versus 24.04 ± 3.20 h, p = 0.211), caesarean delivery (22.2 versus 19.4%, p = 0.783), proportion of neonate with birth asphyxia (8.30 versus 8.30%, p = 1.00) and proportion of neonate admitted into special care baby unit (16.7 versus 13.9%, p = 0.872). Subgroup analysis of participants with 'ripe' cervix at initial pre-induction assessment showed that the mean induction to active phase of labour interval and mean induction to delivery interval were significantly shorter in Premaquick than transvaginal ultrasound group.

Conclusion

Pre-induction cervical assessment at term with either Premaquick biomarkers or transvaginal ultrasound for cervical length is effective, objective and safe with similar and comparable outcome. However, when compared with women with positive transvaginal ultrasound at initial assessment, women with positive Premaquick test at initial assessment showed a significantly shorter duration of onset of active phase of labour and delivery of baby following induction of labour.

Cervical stitch (cerclage) in combination with other treatments for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in singleton pregnancies

BACKGROUND

Preterm birth (PTB) remains the foremost global cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality. Thus, the prevention of spontaneous PTB still remains of critical importance. In an attempt to prevent PTB in singleton pregnancies, cervical cerclage, in combination with other treatments, has been advocated. This is because, cervical cerclage is an intervention that is commonly recommended in women with a short cervix at high risk of preterm birth but, despite this, many women still deliver prematurely, as the biological mechanism is incompletely understood. Additionally, previous Cochrane Reviews have been published on the effectiveness of cervical cerclage in singleton and multiple pregnancies, however, none has evaluated the effectiveness of using cervical cerclage in combination with other treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether antibiotics administration, vaginal pessary, reinforcing or second cerclage placement, tocolytic, progesterone, or other interventions at the time of cervical cerclage placement prolong singleton gestation in women at high risk of pregnancy loss based on prior history and/or ultrasound finding of 'short cervix' and/or physical examination. History-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 12 and 15 weeks gestation based solely on poor prior obstetrical history, e.g. multiple second trimester losses due to painless dilatation. Ultrasound-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 16 and 23 weeks gestation for transvaginal ultrasound cervical length < 20 mm in a woman without cervical dilatation. Physical exam-indicated cerclage is defined as a cerclage placed usually between 16 and 23 weeks gestation because of cervical dilatation of one or more centimetres detected on physical (manual) examination.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (26 September 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published, unpublished or ongoing randomised controlled trial (RCTs). Studies using a cluster-RCT design were also eligible for inclusion in this review but none were identified. We excluded quasi-RCTs (e.g. those randomised by date of birth or hospital number) and studies using a cross-over design. We also excluded studies that specified addition of the combination therapy after cervical cerclage because the woman subsequently became symptomatic. We included studies comparing cervical cerclage in combination with one, two or more interventions with cervical cerclage alone in singleton pregnancies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of all retrieved articles, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and evaluated the certainty of the evidence for this review's main outcomes. Data were checked for accuracy. Standard Cochrane review methods were used throughout.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two studies (involving a total of 73 women) comparing cervical cerclage alone to a different comparator. We also identified three ongoing studies (one investigating vaginal progesterone after cerclage, and two investigating cerclage plus pessary). One study (20 women), conducted in the UK, comparing cervical cerclage in combination with a tocolytic (salbutamol) with cervical cerclage alone in women with singleton pregnancy did not provide any useable data for this review. The other study (involving 53 women, with data from 50 women) took place in the USA and compared cervical cerclage in combination with a tocolytic (indomethacin) and antibiotics (cefazolin or clindamycin) versus cervical cerclage alone - this study did provide useable data for this review (and the study authors also provided additional data on request) but meta-analyses were not possible. This study was generally at a low risk of bias, apart from issues relating to blinding. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for serious risk of bias and imprecision (few participants, few events and wide 95% confidence intervals). Cervical cerclage in combination with an antibiotic and tocolytic versus cervical cerclage alone (one study, 50 women/babies) We are unclear about the effect of cervical cerclage in combination with antibiotics and a tocolytic compared with cervical cerclage alone on the risk of serious neonatal morbidity (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.24; very low-certainty evidence); perinatal loss (data for miscarriage and stillbirth only - data not available for neonatal death) (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.64; very low-certainty evidence) or preterm birth < 34 completed weeks of pregnancy (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.40; very low-certainty evidence). There were no stillbirths (intrauterine death at 24 or more weeks). The trial authors did not report on the numbers of babies discharged home healthy (without obvious pathology) or on the risk of neonatal death.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the effect of combining a tocolytic (indomethacin) and antibiotics (cefazolin/clindamycin) with cervical cerclage compared with cervical cerclage alone for preventing spontaneous PTB in women with singleton pregnancies. Future studies should recruit sufficient numbers of women to provide meaningful results and should measure neonatal death and numbers of babies discharged home healthy, as well as other important outcomes listed in this review. We did not identify any studies looking at other treatments in combination with cervical cerclage. Future research needs to focus on the role of other interventions such as vaginal support pessary, reinforcing or second cervical cerclage placement, 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate or dydrogesterone or vaginal micronised progesterone, omega-3 long chain polyunsaturated fatty acid supplementation and bed rest.