Rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin for prevention of postpartum hemorrhage

Prostaglandins for Postpartum Hemorrhage: Pharmacology, Application, and Current Opinion

BACKGROUND

Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) remains a common cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Medical intervention plays an important role in the prevention and treatment of PPH. Prostaglandins (PGs) are currently recommended as second-line uterotonics, which are applied in cases of persistent bleeding despite oxytocin treatment.

SUMMARY

PG agents that are constantly used in clinical practice include carboprost, sulprostone, and misoprostol, representing the analogs of PGF2α, PGE2, and PGE1, respectively. Injectable PGs, when used to treat PPH, are effective in reducing blood loss but probably induce cardiovascular or respiratory side effects. Misoprostol is characterized by oral administration, low cost, stability in storage, broad availability, and minimal side effects. It remains a treatment option for uterine atony in low-resource settings, but its effectiveness as a uterotonic for independent application may be limited. Key Messages: The present review article discusses the physiological roles of various natural PGs, evaluates the existing evidence of PG analogs in the prevention and treatment of PPH, and finally provides a reference to assist obstetricians in selecting appropriate uterotonics.

Uterotonic drugs to prevent postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic drugs can reduce blood loss and are routinely recommended. There are several uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH, but it is still debatable which drug or combination of drugs is the most effective.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most effective and cost-effective uterotonic drug(s) to prevent PPH, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.

METHODS

The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (1 June 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO)'s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) were searched for unpublished trial reports (30 June 2015). In addition, reference lists of retrieved studies (updated October 2017) were searched for randomised trials evaluating uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH. The study estimated relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH, defined as blood loss of ≥ 500 ml and ≥ 1000 ml. Pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis were performed to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available drugs and combinations thereof [ergometrine, misoprostol (Cytotec^®; Pfizer Inc., New York, NY, USA), misoprostol plus oxytocin (Syntocinon^®; Novartis International AG, Basel, Switzerland), carbetocin (Pabal^®; Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Saint-Prex, Switzerland), ergometrine plus oxytocin (Syntometrine^®; Alliance Pharma plc, Chippenham, UK), oxytocin, and a placebo or no treatment]. Primary outcomes were stratified according to the mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, health-care setting, drug dosage, regimen and route of drug administration. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to study quality and funding source, among others. A model-based economic evaluation compared the relative cost-effectiveness separately for vaginal births and caesareans with or without including side effects.

RESULTS

From 137 randomised trials and 87,466 women, ergometrine plus oxytocin, carbetocin and misoprostol plus oxytocin were found to reduce the risk of PPH blood loss of ≥ 500 ml compared with the standard drug, oxytocin [ergometrine plus oxytocin: risk ratio (RR) 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.83; carbetocin: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.00; misoprostol plus oxytocin: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.6 to 0.9]. Each of these three strategies had 100% cumulative probability of being ranked first, second or third most effective. Oxytocin was ranked fourth, with an almost 0% cumulative probability of being ranked in the top three. Similar rankings were noted for the reduction of PPH blood loss of ≥ 1000 ml (ergometrine plus oxytocin: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.95; carbetocin: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.28; misoprostol plus oxytocin: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.14), and most secondary outcomes. Ergometrine plus oxytocin and misoprostol plus oxytocin had the poorest ranking for side effects. Carbetocin had a favourable side-effect profile, which was similar to oxytocin. However, the analysis was restricted to high-quality studies, carbetocin lost its ranking and was comparable to oxytocin. The relative cost-effectiveness of the alternative strategies is inconclusive, and the results are affected by both the uncertainty and inconsistency in the data reported on adverse events. For vaginal delivery, when assuming no adverse events, ergometrine plus oxytocin is less costly and more effective than all strategies except carbetocin. The strategy of carbetocin is both more effective and more costly than all other strategies. When taking adverse events into consideration, all prevention strategies, except oxytocin, are more costly and less effective than carbetocin. For delivery by caesarean section, with and without adverse events, the relative cost-effectiveness is different, again because of the uncertainty in the available data.

LIMITATIONS

There was considerable uncertainty in findings within the planned subgroup analyses, and subgroup effects cannot be ruled out.

CONCLUSIONS

Ergometrine plus oxytocin, carbetocin and misoprostol plus oxytocin are more effective uterotonic drug strategies for preventing PPH than the current standard, oxytocin. Ergometrine plus oxytocin and misoprostol plus oxytocin cause significant side effects. Carbetocin has a favourable side-effect profile, which was similar to oxytocin. However, most carbetocin trials are small and of poor quality. There is a need for a large high-quality trial comparing carbetocin with oxytocin; such a trial is currently being conducted by the WHO. The relative cost-effectiveness is inconclusive, and results are affected by uncertainty and inconsistency in adverse events data.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015020005; Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group (substudy) reference number 0871; PROSPERO-Cochrane (substudy) reference number CRD42015026568; and sponsor reference number ERN_13-1414 (University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK).

FUNDING

Funding for this study was provided by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme in a research award to the University of Birmingham and supported by the UK charity Ammalife (UK-registered charity 1120236). The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data synthesis, interpretation or writing of the report.

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) rates in randomized trials of PPH prophylactic interventions and the effect of underlying participant PPH risk: a meta-analysis

Background

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) remains a leading cause of maternal mortality. Many trials assessing interventions to prevent PPH base their data on low risk women. It is important to consider the impact data collection methods may have on these results. This review aims to assess trials of PPH prophylaxis by grading trials according to the degree of risk status of the population enrolled in these trials and identify differences in the PPH rates of low risk and high risk populations.

Methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Trials were identified through CENTRAL. Trials were assessed for eligibility then graded according to antenatal risk factors and method of birth into five grades. The main outcomes were overall trial rate of minor PPH (blood loss ≥500 ml) and major PPH (> 1000 ml) and method of determining blood loss (estimated/measured).

Results

There was no relationship between minor or major PPH rate and risk grade (Kruskal-Wallis: minor - T = 0.92, p = 0.82; major - T = 0.91, p = 0.92). There was no difference in minor or major PPH rates when comparing estimation or measurement methods (Mann-Whitney: minor - U = 67, p = 0.75; major - U = 35, p = 0.72). There was however a correlation between % operative births and minor PPH rate, but not major PPH (Spearman r = 0.32 v. Spearman r = 0.098).

Conclusions

Using data from trials using low risk women to generalise best practice guidelines might not be appropriate for all births, particularly complex births. Although complex births contribute disproportionately to PPH rates, this review showed they are often underrepresented in trials. Despite this, there was no difference in reported PPH rates between studies conducted in high and low risk groups. Method of birth was shown to be an important risk factor for minor PPH and may be a better predictor of PPH than antenatal risk factors. Women with operative births are often excluded from trials meaning a lack of data supporting interventions in these women. More focus on complex births is needed to ensure the evidence base is relevant to the target population.

Carbetocin versus rectal misoprostol for management of third stage of labor among women with low risk of postpartum hemorrhage

OBJECTIVE

To compare effectiveness and safety of carbetocin and misoprostol for prevention of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) among low-risk women.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial among 150 pregnant women with low risk of PPH admitted for vaginal delivery at Kasr Al Ainy Hospital, Cairo, Egypt, between July 2018 and May 2019. Participants were assigned to two groups by a web-based randomization system ensuring allocation concealment. After neonatal delivery, the carbetocin group received one ampoule of carbetocin (100 μg/mL) intravenously and the misoprostol group received two rectal tablets of misoprostol (800 μg) for active management of the third stage. Blood pressure, blood loss, and hemoglobin levels were monitored. The primary outcome measure was need for additional uterotonic drugs.

RESULTS

The carbetocin group had significantly less blood loss (P<0.001), shorter third stage (P<0.001), and less need for additional uterotonics (P=0.013) or uterine massage (P=0.007). The two drugs were hemodynamically safe. Hemoglobin levels after delivery were comparable in the two groups (P=0.475). Adverse effects were more common in the misoprostol group (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among low-risk women, carbetocin seems to be a better alternative to misoprostol for active management of the third stage of labor; it reduced blood loss and use of additional uterotonic drugs. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT03556852.

Care technologies to prevent and control hemorrhage in the third stage of labor: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

to identify evidence concerning the contribution of health technologies used to prevent and control hemorrhaging in the third stage of labor.

METHOD

systematic review with database searches. First, two researchers independently selected the papers and, at a second point in time, held a reconciliation meeting. The Kappa coefficient was used to assess agreement, while the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation was adopted to assess risk of bias and classify level of evidence.

RESULTS

in this review, 42 papers were included, 34 of which addressed product technologies, most referred to pharmacological products, while two papers addressed the use of blood transparent plastic bags collector and the contribution of birth spacing and prenatal care. The eight papers addressing process technologies included the active management of the third stage of labor, controlled cord traction, uterine massage, and educational interventions.

CONCLUSION

product and process technologies presented high and moderate evidence confirmed in 61.90% of the papers. The levels of evidence confirm the contribution of technologies to prevent and control hemorrhaging. Clinical nurses should provide scientific-based care and develop protocols addressing nursing care actions.

A prospective study to compare the effectiveness of adjunctive rectal misoprostol or oxytocin titration in the prevention of primary post-partum haemorrhage in at risk patients

Background

Adjunctive uterotonic in patients at risk of primary post-partum haemorrhage may reduce its incidence.

Objective

To compare the effectiveness and safety of adjunctive rectal misoprostol with adjunctive intravenous oxytocin for the prevention of primary post-partum haemorrhage in at risk patients.

Materials and methods

A total of 122 patients with risk factors for uterine atony were allocated to receive either 600µg of rectal misoprostol (n= 61) or 20IU of oxytocin infusion (n=61) after routine management of third stage of labour. Post-partum blood loss was measured using differential delivery towel and pad weighing.

Results

There was similarity in the estimated post-partum blood loss, with no significant difference in the mean post-partum hematocrit levels between the adjunctive rectal misoprostol group and oxytocin infusion group (P=0.712). There was no difference in the need for additional intervention of uterotonics between the two groups. There were however, higher incidences of shivering and pyrexia among those that received misoprostol compared with the oxytocin group.

Conclusion

Rectal misoprostol is as effective and safe as oxytocin when used as an adjunctive uterotonic in preventing primary post-partum haemorrhage in patients with risk factors for uterine atony after active management of third stage of labour.

Uterotonic agents for preventing postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The current World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for preventing PPH is 10 IU (international units) of intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin. There are several uterotonic agents for preventing PPH but there is still uncertainty about which agent is most effective with the least side effects. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in April 2018 and was updated to incorporate results from a recent large WHO trial.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) to prevent PPH with the least side effects, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (24 May 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and side effects of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents, placebo or no treatment for preventing PPH were eligible for inclusion. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included blood loss and related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, maternal well-being and satisfaction and side effects. Primary outcomes were also reported for pre-specified subgroups, stratifying by mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of administration. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available agents.

MAIN RESULTS

The network meta-analysis included 196 trials (135,559 women) involving seven uterotonic agents and placebo or no treatment, conducted across 53 countries (including high-, middle- and low-income countries). Most trials were performed in a hospital setting (187/196, 95.4%) with women undergoing a vaginal birth (71.5%, 140/196).Relative effects from the network meta-analysis suggested that all agents were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. The three highest ranked uterotonic agents for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination and carbetocin. There is evidence that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.84, moderate certainty), carbetocin (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.93, moderate certainty) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.86, low certainty) may reduce PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol, injectable prostaglandins, and ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin.All agents except ergometrine and injectable prostaglandins were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. High-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.11) make little or no difference in the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin meanwhile the evidence on carbetocin was of very low certainty. High-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol is less effective in preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with oxytocin (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.42). Despite the comparable relative treatment effects between all uterotonics (except misoprostol) and oxytocin, ergometrine plus oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combinations and carbetocin were the highest ranked agents for PPH ≥ 1000 mL.Misoprostol plus oxytocin reduces the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73, high certainty) and probably also reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70, moderate certainty) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin, injectable prostaglandins and ergometrine plus oxytocin may also reduce the use of additional uterotonics but the certainty of the evidence is low. No meaningful differences could be detected between all agents for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were rare in the included randomised trials where they were reported.The two combination regimens were associated with important side effects. When compared with oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.18, high certainty) and fever (RR 3.14, 95% CI 2.20 to 4.49, moderate certainty). Ergometrine plus oxytocin increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.93, 95% CI 2.08 to 4.13, moderate certainty) and may make little or no difference to the risk of hypertension, however absolute effects varied considerably and the certainty of the evidence was low for this outcome.Subgroup analyses did not reveal important subgroup differences by mode of birth (caesarean versus vaginal birth), setting (hospital versus community), risk of PPH (high versus low risk for PPH), dose of misoprostol (≥ 600 mcg versus < 600 mcg) and regimen of oxytocin (bolus versus bolus plus infusion versus infusion only).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All agents were generally effective for preventing PPH when compared with placebo or no treatment. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination may have some additional desirable effects compared with the current standard oxytocin. The two combination regimens, however, are associated with significant side effects. Carbetocin may be more effective than oxytocin for some outcomes without an increase in side effects.

Uterotonic agents for preventing postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic drugs can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. There are several uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH but it is still debatable which drug is best.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most effective uterotonic drug(s) to prevent PPH, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (1 June 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for unpublished trial reports (30 June 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled comparisons or cluster trials of effectiveness or side-effects of uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH.Quasi-randomised trials and cross-over trials are not eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available drugs. We stratified our primary outcomes according to mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of drug administration, to detect subgroup effects.The absolute risks in the oxytocin are based on meta-analyses of proportions from the studies included in this review and the risks in the intervention groups were based on the assumed risk in the oxytocin group and the relative effects of the interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

This network meta-analysis included 140 randomised trials with data from 88,947 women. There are two large ongoing studies. The trials were mostly carried out in hospital settings and recruited women who were predominantly more than 37 weeks of gestation having a vaginal birth. The majority of trials were assessed to have uncertain risk of bias due to poor reporting of study design. This primarily impacted on our confidence in comparisons involving carbetocin trials more than other uterotonics.The three most effective drugs for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination. These three options were more effective at preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin, the drug currently recommended by the WHO (ergometrine plus oxytocin risk ratio (RR) 0.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.83), moderate-quality evidence; carbetocin RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.00), very low-quality evidence; misoprostol plus oxytocin RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.90), moderate-quality evidence). Based on these results, about 10.5% women given oxytocin would experience a PPH of ≥ 500 mL compared with 7.2% given ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, 7.6% given carbetocin, and 7.7% given misoprostol plus oxytocin. Oxytocin was ranked fourth with close to 0% cumulative probability of being ranked in the top three for PPH ≥ 500 mL.The outcomes and rankings for the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL were similar to those of PPH ≥ 500 mL. with the evidence for ergometrine plus oxytocin combination being more effective than oxytocin (RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.95), high-quality evidence) being more certain than that for carbetocin (RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.28), low-quality evidence), or misoprostol plus oxytocin combination (RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.14), moderate-quality evidence)There were no meaningful differences between all drugs for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were so rare in the included randomised trials.Two combination regimens had the poorest rankings for side-effects. Specifically, the ergometrine plus oxytocin combination had the higher risk for vomiting (RR 3.10 (95% CI 2.11 to 4.56), high-quality evidence; 1.9% versus 0.6%) and hypertension [RR 1.77 (95% CI 0.55 to 5.66), low-quality evidence; 1.2% versus 0.7%), while the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination had the higher risk for fever (RR 3.18 (95% CI 2.22 to 4.55), moderate-quality evidence; 11.4% versus 3.6%) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin had similar risk for side-effects compared with oxytocin although the quality evidence was very low for vomiting and for fever, and was low for hypertension.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination were more effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL than the current standard oxytocin. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination was more effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL than oxytocin. Misoprostol plus oxytocin combination evidence is less consistent and may relate to different routes and doses of misoprostol used in the studies. Carbetocin had the most favourable side-effect profile amongst the top three options; however, most carbetocin trials were small and at high risk of bias.Amongst the 11 ongoing studies listed in this review there are two key studies that will inform a future update of this review. The first is a WHO-led multi-centre study comparing the effectiveness of a room temperature stable carbetocin versus oxytocin (administered intramuscularly) for preventing PPH in women having a vaginal birth. The trial includes around 30,000 women from 10 countries. The other is a UK-based trial recruiting more than 6000 women to a three-arm trial comparing carbetocin, oxytocin and ergometrine plus oxytocin combination. Both trials are expected to report in 2018.Consultation with our consumer group demonstrated the need for more research into PPH outcomes identified as priorities for women and their families, such as women's views regarding the drugs used, clinical signs of excessive blood loss, neonatal unit admissions and breastfeeding at discharge. To date, trials have rarely investigated these outcomes. Consumers also considered the side-effects of uterotonic drugs to be important but these were often not reported. A forthcoming set of core outcomes relating to PPH will identify outcomes to prioritise in trial reporting and will inform futures updates of this review. We urge all trialists to consider measuring these outcomes for each drug in all future randomised trials. Lastly, future evidence synthesis research could compare the effects of different dosages and routes of administration for the most effective drugs.

Double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing misoprostol and oxytocin for management of the third stage of labor in a Nigerian hospital

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of oral misoprostol with that of oxytocin for active management of the third stage of labor (AMTSL).

METHODS

A double-blind randomized control trial was undertaken at a center in Ilorin, Nigeria, between January and June 2013. Every other eligible patient (in the first stage of labor at term, to have a spontaneous vaginal delivery, and no/low risk of postpartum hemorrhage [PPH]) were randomly assigned with computer-generated random numbers to receive oral misoprostol (600μg) plus placebo injection or oral placebo plus oxytocin injection (1mL of 10IU) in the third stage of labor. The primary outcome was amount of blood loss during delivery.

RESULTS

Mean postpartum blood loss was 325.85±164.72mL in the 100 patients given misoprostol and 303.95±163.33mL in the 100 patients given oxytocin (P=0.391). PPH (≥500mL blood loss) was recorded in 15 (15.0%) patients given misoprostol and 14 (14.0%) given oxytocin (P=0.841). Shivering, pyrexia, and diarrhea were all significantly more common in the misoprostol group (P<0.01 for all).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of oral misoprostol was similar to that of intramuscular oxytocin. Adverse effects associated with misoprostol were transient and self-limiting. Thus, oral misoprostol is efficacious and a good alternative to oxytocin for AMTSL. Pan African Clinical Trials Registry:PACTR201407000825227.

Comparison effect of intravenous tranexamic acid and misoprostol for postpartum haemorrhage

Background:

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the third-most common cause of maternal death in the United States and it is still the first prevalent cause of maternal death in developing countries. Active prevention of haemorrhage with an uterotonic or other new drugs leads to a decrease in postpartum vaginal haemorrhage. The aim of this study was to compare anti-haemorrhagic effect of Tranexamic acid (TXA) and Misoprostol for PPH.

Patients and Methods:

In a double-blinded randomised control clinical trial, 200 women were included after Caesarean or natural vaginal delivery with abnormal PPH. They were divided into two equal intervention and control groups. Effect of intravenous TXA and Misoprostol for postpartum haemorrhage was examined.

Results:

The mean age of patients was 26.7 ± 6.5 years which ranged from 14 to 43 years. The sonographic gestational age in the group treated with TXA was 37.7 ± 3.4 weeks and it was 37.4 ± 3.3 weeks for the other group (P = 0.44). The haemorrhage in the TXA and Misoprostol groups was 1.2 ± 0.33 litres and 1.18 ± 0.47 litres, respectively (P = 0.79). The haemoglobin levels after 6-12 hours of labour, in TXA group was more than that of the Misoprostol group, but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.22 and P = 0.21, respectively).

Conclusion:

Regarding to the superior results in Misoprostol group in one hand and lack of significant differences between two groups in haemorrhage during labour, post-partum haemoglobin level and discharge haemoglobin level, we can state that Misoprostol has no specific preferences to TXA, but more studies with greater population are needed.

Obstetric outcome of twin gestations in a tertiary hospital South-western Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Twin pregnancy is considered a high risk pregnancy due to associated adverse obstetric outcomes. The objective was to determine the prevalence, complications and the obstetric outcomes of twin deliveries in EKSUTH.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of twin gestations managed at the Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital, Ado-Ekiti between January 2009 and December 2012 was done.

RESULTS

The prevalence of twin deliveries was 1 in 23 deliveries (4.3%). Increasing age and parity and Yoruba ethnicity were associated with higher twinning rate. The mean gestational age at delivery was 36.6 ± 2.9 weeks and the mean birth weight was 2.47 ± 0.49 kg with first twins having higher birth weight. Spontaneous vaginal delivery was the most common mode of delivery accounting for 52.6% and 49.3% in twin 1 and twin 2, respectively, and majority (39.5%) of the twins were in cephalic-cephalic presentation. The most common indication for caesarean delivery was breech presentation in the first twin. Preterm labour was the commonest maternal complications occurring in 25.7% of cases. The perinatal mortality rate was 105 per 1000 deliveries and this was significantly associated with unbooked patients, p = 0.001. There were no maternal deaths.

CONCLUSION

Preterm labour remains the commonest complication with associated high perinatal mortality.

[An update of the obstetrics hemorrhage treatment protocol]

Obstetric hemorrhage is still a major cause of maternal and fetal morbimortality in developed countries. This is an underestimated problem, which usually appears unpredictably. A high proportion of the morbidity of obstetric hemorrhage is considered to be preventable if adequately managed. The major international clinical guidelines recommend producing consensus management protocols, adapted to local characteristics and keep them updated in the light of experience and new scientific publications. We present a protocol updated, according to the latest recommendations, and our own experience, in order to be used as a basis for those anesthesiologists who wish to use and adapt it locally to their daily work. This last aspect is very important to be effective, and is a task to be performed at each center, according to the availability of resources, personnel and architectural features.

Carbetocin versus sublingual misoprostol plus oxytocin infusion for prevention of postpartum hemorrhage at cesarean section in patients with risk factors: a randomized, open trail study

OBJECTIVES

To compare combined sublingual misoprostol plus oxytocin infusion with intravenous carbetocin for prevention of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) in patients with risk factors during cesarean section (CS).

METHODS

In this randomized study, 380 patients were randomly allocated to receive either combined 400 μg sublingual misoprostol before surgery plus 20 IU oxytocin after delivery of baby (n = 190) or intravenous 100 μg carbetocin (n = 190). The main outcome measure was requirement of additional pharmacological uterotonic. Secondary outcomes were the difference in preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin, estimated blood loss, incidence of blood transfusion and adverse effects.

RESULTS

16.3 % of women who received sublingual misoprostol plus oxytocin infusion required additional uterotonic versus 13.7 % of women who received intravenous carbetocin with no significant difference (p = 0.27). No significant difference between treatment groups in preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin level change, estimated blood loss, incidence of blood transfusion was observed. Shivering and fever were significantly higher with misoprostol plus oxytocin (p = <0.001 and <0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Both sublingual misoprostol plus oxytocin infusion and intravenous carbetocin are similarly effective for the prevention of PPH in patients with risk factors during CS.

Postpartum misoprostol for preventing maternal mortality and morbidity

BACKGROUND

The primary objective of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) prevention and treatment is to reduce maternal deaths. Misoprostol has the major public health advantage over injectable medication that it can more easily be distributed at community level. Because misoprostol might have adverse effects unrelated to blood loss which might impact on mortality or severe morbidity, it is important to continue surveillance of all relevant evidence from randomised trials. This is particularly important as misoprostol is being introduced on a large scale for PPH prevention in low-income countries, and is commonly used for PPH treatment in well-resourced settings as well.

OBJECTIVES

To review maternal deaths and severe morbidity in all randomised trials of misoprostol for prevention or treatment of PPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (11 January 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials including pregnant women who received misoprostol in the postpartum period, versus placebo/no treatment or other uterotonics for prevention or treatment of PPH, and reporting on maternal death, severe morbidity or pyrexia.We planned to include cluster- and quasi-randomised trials in the analysis, as a very large number of women will be needed to obtain robust estimates of maternal mortality but we did not identify any for this version of the review. In future updates of this review we will include trials reported only as abstracts if sufficient information is available from the abstract or from the authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 78 studies (59,216 women) and excluded 34 studies.There was no statistically significant difference in maternal mortality for misoprostol compared with control groups overall (31 studies; 11/19,715 versus 4/20,076 deaths; risk ratio (RR) 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 5.28); or for the trials of misoprostol versus placebo: 10 studies, 6/4626 versus 1/4707 ; RR 2.70; 95% CI 0.72 to 10.11; or for misoprostol versus other uterotonics: 21 studies, 5/15,089 versus 3/15,369 (19/100,000); RR 1.54; 95% CI 0.40 to 5.92. All 11 deaths in the misoprostol arms occurred in studies of misoprostol ≥ 600 µg.There was a statistically significant difference in the composite outcome 'maternal death or severe morbidity' for the comparison of misoprostol versus placebo (12 studies; average RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.81; Tau² = 0.00, I² = 0%) but not for the comparison of misoprostol versus other uterotonics (17 studies; average RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.52; Tau² = 1.81, I² = 69%). When we excluded hyperpyrexia from the composite outcome in exploratory analyses, there was no significant difference in either of these comparisons.Pyrexia > 38°C was increased with misoprostol compared with controls (56 studies, 2776/25,647 (10.8%) versus 614/26,800 (2.3%); average RR 3.97, 95% CI 3.13 to 5.04; Tau² = 0.47, I² = 80%). The effect was greater for trials using misoprostol 600 µg or more (27 studies; 2197/17,864 (12.3%) versus 422/18,161 (2.3%); average RR 4.64; 95% CI 3.33 to 6.46; Tau² = 0.51, I² = 86%) than for those using misoprostol 400 µg or less (31 studies; 525/6751 (7.8%) versus 185/7668 (2.4%); average RR 3.07; 95% CI 2.25 to 4.18; Tau² = 0.29, I² = 58%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Misoprostol does not appear to increase or reduce severe morbidity (excluding hyperpyrexia) when used to prevent or treat PPH. Misoprostol did not increase or decrease maternal mortality. However, misoprostol is associated with an increased risk of pyrexia, particularly in dosages of 600 µg or more. Given that misoprostol is used prophylactically in very large numbers of healthy women, the greatest emphasis should be placed on limiting adverse effects. In this context, the findings of this review support the use of the lowest effective dose. As for any new medication being used on a large scale, continued vigilance for adverse effects is essential and there is a need for large randomised trials to further elucidate both the relative effectiveness and the risks of various dosages of misoprostol.

Prevention of post-partum hemorrhage by rectal Misoprostol: A randomized clinical trial

Background:

Post-partum hemorrhage (PPH) is a common cause of maternal mortality in developing countries. This trial was conducted to study the effectiveness and safety of rectal misoprostol for PPH.

Aim:

To assess the effectiveness and safety of misoprostol and comparing with oxytocin for prevention of PPH.

Materials and Methods:

Women were randomized to receive either two 200 μg rectal misoprostol tablets (study group) or 20 units oxytocin in 1000 cc normal saline intravenously (control group). The outcomes were incidence of PPH, amount of blood loss, duration of labor, incidence of side effects, pre- and post-delivery hemoglobin, and use of additional uterotonics.

Finding:

The incidence of PPH was 12% in the study group and 10% in the control group (P > 0.05). No significant difference was observed between the groups hematocrit (P > 0.05). Other variables including severe PPH and duration of the third stage of labor were similar in both groups.

Conclusion:

Rectal misoprostol was as effective as intravenous oxytocin for preventing post-partum hemorrhage with the same incidence of side effects and is recommended to be use as an uterotonic agent to manage third stage of labor routinely.

Prostaglandins for preventing postpartum haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Prostaglandins have mainly been used for postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) when other measures fail. Misoprostol, a new and inexpensive prostaglandin E1 analogue, has been suggested as an alternative for routine management of the third stage of labour.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of prophylactic prostaglandin use in the third stage of labour.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (7 January 2011). We updated this search on 25 May 2012 and added the results to the awaiting classification section.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing a prostaglandin agent with another uterotonic or no prophylactic uterotonic (nothing or placebo) as part of management of the third stage of labour. The primary outcomes were blood loss 1000 mL or more and the use of additional uterotonics.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 72 trials (52,678 women). Oral or sublingual misoprostol compared with placebo is effective in reducing severe PPH (oral: seven trials, 6225 women, not totalled due to significant heterogeneity; sublingual: risk ratio (RR) 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 0.98; one trial, 661 women) and blood transfusion (oral: RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.94; four trials, 3519 women).Compared with conventional injectable uterotonics, oral misoprostol was associated with higher risk of severe PPH (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.52; 17 trials, 29,797 women) and use of additional uterotonics, but with a trend to fewer blood transfusions (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.66 to 1.06; 15 trials; 28,213 women). Additional uterotonic data were not totalled due to heterogeneity. Misoprostol use is associated with significant increases in shivering and a temperature of 38º Celsius compared with both placebo and other uterotonics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Oral or sublingual misoprostol shows promising results when compared with placebo in reducing blood loss after delivery. The margin of benefit may be affected by whether other components of the management of the third stage of labour are used or not. As side-effects are dose-related, research should be directed towards establishing the lowest effective dose for routine use, and the optimal route of administration.Neither intramuscular prostaglandins nor misoprostol are preferable to conventional injectable uterotonics as part of the management of the third stage of labour especially for low-risk women; however, evidence has been building for the use of oral misoprostol to be effective and safe in areas with low access to facilities and skilled healthcare providers and future research on misoprostol use in the community should focus on implementation issues.

Impact of preoperative rectal misoprostol on blood loss during and after elective cesarean delivery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of preoperative administration of rectal misoprostol on blood loss during and after elective cesarean delivery.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was conducted among 400 women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery. The study group (n=200) received 400 μg of misoprostol. The control group (n=200) received placebo. Study medications were administered rectally after catheter insertion and shortly before skin incision. The main outcome measures were intra-operative blood loss, postpartum blood loss at 24 hours, and difference between preoperative and postoperative hematocrit values.

RESULTS

The mean intra-operative and postpartum blood loss was significantly lower in the study group than the control group: 429 ± 234 mL and 185 ± 95 mL versus 620 ± 375 mL and 324 ± 167 mL, respectively (P=0.001 for both comparisons). The difference between the preoperative and postoperative hematocrit values was also significantly lower in the study group than the control group (4.62 ± 2.45 versus 8.15 ± 3.84; P=0.02). Admissions to the neonatal intensive care unit and Apgar scores at 1 and 5 minutes were comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative treatment with 400 μg rectal misoprostol significantly reduced blood loss related to elective cesarean delivery.

Management of third stage of labor with misoprostol: A comparison of three routes of administration

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

Misoprostol is a versatile drug with an effective uterotonic effect on the postpartum uterine tissue and is used through various routes during the third stage of labor.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

A randomized prospective study was carried out to analyze the most effective route for misoprostol administration, with an emphasis on parturients' acceptability and compliance, a possible shortening of the duration of the third stage of labor, minimization of blood loss and possibly reducing the incidence of potential side effects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study groups comprised of 300 healthy parturients, divided randomly into three groups of 100 parturients each, who were administered misoprostol 400 μg through the oral (O), rectal (R), and sublingual (S) routes, respectively, during the third stage of labor. Estimation of blood loss was measured in terms of fall in hemoglobin, hematocrit, and packed cell volume (PCV) levels, and duration of the third stage of labor was also compared.

RESULTS

The mean duration for the third stage of labor was significantly shorter in group S (3.62 minutes) as compared to R (4.12 minutes), and O (4.94 minutes) (P = 0.02). The average blood loss was observed to be the least in the group S (210 ml) as compared to group R (230 ml), and group O. The incidence of shivering and fever was observed to be significantly higher (25 and 15%) in the parturients of group S (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

All routes were equally effective in managing the third stage of labor, but administration of misoprostol through the rectal route evoked better acceptability, comparable efficacy, and had an incidence of minimal side effects.

[Update on the use of uterotonic agents]

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is defined by the WHO as a blood loss >500mL after vaginal delivery or >1000mL after caesarean section during the first 24hours post-delivery. Although the incidence of maternal mortality caused by PPH has decreased, it continues to be the major cause of maternal mortality due to obstetric haemorrhage. Furthermore, the incidence of uterine atony, which is the most prevalent cause of PPH, is still increasing in both vaginal delivery and caesarean section. Although PPH occurs in more than two thirds of patients without any identifiable risk factor, a prolonged third stage of labour is the main risk factor. Active management of the third stage of labour has been postulated to reduce the risk of bleeding in this period. It includes the administration of uterotonic agents after the birth of the baby. Uterotonic agents are defined as drugs that produce adequate uterine contraction. These drugs can be used as prophylactic therapy or treatment. The prophylactic use of uterotonic agents has been reported to be associated with a shorter third stage of labour, less risk of PPH and less need of additional uterotonic agents. There are currently four drugs or groups of drugs with uterotonic action: oxytocin, carbetocin, ergot derivatives and prostaglandins. The literature on this subject is extensive, heterogeneous and sometimes discordant. Oxytocin is still the first-line uterotonic drug for prophylaxis and treatment of uterine atony. There is a common trend to use high doses of uterotonics for fear of inadequate uterine contraction, but the current literature recommends its reduction. Methylergonovine continues being the second-line uterotonic agent in the prophylaxis and treatment of PPH, because of its side effects. Despite carboprost (PGF2α) side effects, it is still the first-line prostaglandin for PPH treatment. Misoprostol may be an alternative to oxytocin when it is not available, although it needs further studies to support this. Finally, the prophylactic use of carbetocin should be individualised.

Misoprostol for the prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage

INTRODUCTION

Uterotonic drugs are recommended for the prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), and oxytocin is considered the gold standard for both indications due to its established efficacy and safety. Unfortunately, access to oxytocin is still limited in many low-resource settings due to the need for cool storage, sterile equipment and administration by skilled personnel. Misoprostol , an E1 prostaglandin analog, has therefore been explored as an alternative for such settings due to its proven ability to induce uterine contractions, low cost, stability at room temperature and ease of administration.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers evidence from 51 randomized controlled trials for both prevention and treatment of PPH. It discusses efficacy and side effects in the context of the various doses that have been studied using oral, sublingual or rectal routes of administration for both indications.

EXPERT OPINION

There is now a solid body of evidence to justify the use of misoprostol for postpartum hemorrhage indications in many settings. The evidence supports use of 600 μg orally for the prevention of PPH and 800 μg sublingually for the treatment of PPH. There is no evidence to support the adjunct use of misoprostol following administration of conventional uterotonics for prevention or treatment purposes.

Medication errors in the obstetrics emergency ward in a low resource setting

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the patterns of medication errors in the obstetric emergency ward in a low resource setting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This prospective observational study included 10,000 women who presented at the obstetric emergency ward, department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Menofyia University Hospital, Egypt between March and December 2010. All medications prescribed in the emergency ward were monitored for different types of errors. The head nurse in each shift was asked to monitor each pharmacologic order from the moment of prescribing till its administration. Retrospective review of the patients' charts and nurses' notes was carried out by the authors of this paper. Results were tabulated and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 1976 medication errors were detected. Administration errors were the commonest error reported. Omitted errors ranked second followed by unauthorized and prescription errors. Three administration errors resulted in three Cesareans were performed for fetal distress because of wrong doses of oxytocin infusion. The rest of errors did not cause patients harm but may have lead to an increase in monitoring. Most errors occurred during night shifts.

CONCLUSION

The availability of automated infusion pumps will probably decrease administration errors significantly. There is a need for more obstetricians and nurses during the nightshifts to minimize errors resulting from working under stressful conditions.

Choosing early pregnancy termination methods in Urban Mozambique

Little is known about who chooses medication abortion with misoprostol and why. Women seeking early abortion in 5 public hospitals in Maputo, Mozambique were recruited in 2005 and 2006 to explore decision-making strategies, method preferences and experiences with misoprostol and vacuum aspiration for early abortion. Client screenings (n=1799), structured clinical surveys (n=837), in-depth exit interviews (n=70), and nurse focus groups (n=2) were conducted. Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data revealed seemingly contradictory findings. Choice of method reflected women's heightened concerns about privacy, pain, quality of home support, HIV infection risk, sexuality, and safety of research participation. Urban Mozambican women are highly motivated to find early pregnancy termination techniques that they deem socially and clinically low-risk. Although 42% found vaginal misoprostol self-administration challenging and 25% delayed care for over a week to amass funds for user fees, almost all (96%) reported adequate preparation and comfort with home management. Women reported satisfaction with all methods and quality of care, even if the initial method failed or pain management or postabortion contraception were not offered. A more nuanced understanding of what women value most can yield service delivery models that are responsive and effective in reducing maternal death and disability from unsafe abortion.

Physicians' approaches to post-abortion care in Manila, Philippines

OBJECTIVE

To assess the knowledge and practice of health professionals in Manila, Philippines, regarding methods used for uterine evacuation in post-abortion care (PAC), including the use of misoprostol.

METHODS

A purposive sample of physicians providing PAC services completed questionnaires anonymously about PAC practices.

RESULTS

Among 45 survey respondents, the primary methods used for first-trimester uterine evacuation in PAC included sharp curettage (n=45, 100%) and manual vacuum aspiration (MVA; n=38, 84.4%), which was consistent with their preferences. Misoprostol was prescribed for first-trimester post-abortion uterine evacuation by 55.6% (n=25) of respondents; dosing regimens ranged from 50 to 200 microg as a single dose or repeated every 4-24 hours. Of the respondents, 91.1% (n=41) prescribed misoprostol for obstetric indications, including labor induction and postpartum hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

Most respondents used sharp curettage and MVA for first-trimester post-abortion uterine evacuation, and did not express a clear preference for either method. Despite the unregistered status of misoprostol, it was used in obstetrics and PAC by a majority of study respondents. The doses of misoprostol used for post-abortion uterine evacuation are lower than those recommended by evidence-based studies. The results indicate the need to disseminate evidence-based information about safe and effective use of MVA and misoprostol for PAC to physicians in Manila, Philippines.

Prostaglandins for preventing postpartum haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Prostaglandins have mainly been used for postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) when other measures fail. Misoprostol, a new and inexpensive prostaglandin E1 analogue, has been suggested as an alternative for routine management of the third stage of labour.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of prophylactic prostaglandin use in the third stage of labour.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2007) and PubMed (July 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials comparing a prostaglandin agent with another uterotonic or no prophylactic uterotonic (nothing or placebo) as part of management of the third stage of labour. The primary outcomes were blood loss 1000 ml or more and the use of additional uterotonics.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility and trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven misoprostol and nine intramuscular prostaglandin trials (42,621 women) were included. Oral (seven trials, 2849 women) or sublingual misoprostol (relative risk (RR) 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 0.98; one trial, 661 women) compared to placebo may be effective in reducing severe PPH and blood transfusion (RR 0.31; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.94; five oral misoprostol trials, 3519 women). The severe PPH analysis of oral misoprostol trials was not totalled due to significant heterogeneity. Compared to conventional injectable uterotonics, oral misoprostol was associated with higher risk of severe PPH (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.51; 16 trials, 29,042 women) and use of additional uterotonics but with fewer blood transfusions (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.02; 15 trials, 27,858 women). Additional uterotonic data were not totalled due to heterogeneity. Misoprostol use is associated with significant increases in shivering and a temperature of 38 degrees Celsius. There are scarce data comparing injectable prostaglandins with the conventional injectable uterotonics on severe PPH and the use of additional uterotonics, the primary outcomes of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Misoprostol orally or sublingually at a dose of 600 mcg shows promising results when compared to placebo in reducing blood loss after delivery. The margin of benefit may be affected by whether other components of management of the third stage of labour are used or not. As side-effects are dose-related, research should be directed towards establishing the lowest effective dose for routine use, and the optimal route of administration. Neither intramuscular prostaglandins nor misoprostol are preferable to conventional injectable uterotonics as part of the management of the third stage of labour especially for low-risk women.