Tocolytics used as adjunctive therapy at the time of cerclage placement: a systematic review

Maintenance tocolysis, tocolysis in preterm premature rupture of membranes and in cervical cerclage - a Germany-wide survey on the current practice after dissemination of the German guideline

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the adherence of German perinatal specialist units and those of basic obstetric care to the national guideline we compared data from a nation-wide survey on the practice of maintenance tocolysis, tocolysis in preterm premature rupture of membranes and in the perioperative setting of cervical cerclage, and bedrest during and after tocolysis with recommendations from the current German Guideline 015/025 "Prevention and Treatment of Preterm Birth".

METHODS

632 obstetric clinics in Germany were approached and received a link to an online questionnaire. Data were descriptively analyzed by performing measures of frequency. To compare two or more groups Fisher's exact test was used.

RESULTS

The response rate was 19%; 23 (19.2%) of respondents did not perform maintenance tocolysis, while 97 (80.8%) conducted maintenance tocolysis; 30 (25.0%) of obstetric units performed cervical cerclage without tocolysis and 90 (75.0%) combined cervical cerclage with tocolysis; 11 (9.2%) of respondents did not use tocolytics in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes, while 109 (90.8%) conducted tocolysis in these patients; 69 (57.5%) of obstetric units did not recommend bed rest during tocolysis, whereas 51 (42.5%) favored bedrest. Perinatal care centers of basic obstetric care recommend bed arrest during tocolysis statistically significant more often to their patients than those of higher perinatal care levels (53.6 vs. 32.8%, p=0.0269).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our survey are in accordance to others from different countries and reveal considerable discrepancies between evidence-based guideline recommendations and daily clinical practice.

Adjunct Therapy at Time of Examination-Indicated Cervical Cerclage in Singleton Pregnancies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Physical examination-indicated cerclage for cervical insufficiency prolongs gestation, but evidence on the addition of adjuncts to further prolong latency is limited. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare gestational latency between those who did and did not receive adjunct antibiotic or tocolytic therapy at the time of examination-indicated cerclage.

STUDY DESIGN

Electronic databases (1966-2020) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing adjunct antibiotic or tocolytic use versus nonuse at time of examination-indicated cerclage, defined as placement for cervical dilation ≥1 cm, in a current singleton pregnancy. Studies including individuals with intra-amniotic infection, cerclage in place, nonviable gestation, or ruptured membranes were excluded. The primary outcome was latency from cerclage placement to delivery. Secondary outcomes included preterm birth, preterm premature rupture of membranes, birth weight, and neonatal survival. Risk of bias was assessed using standardized tools. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ 2 and I 2 tests. Results were pooled and analyzed using a random-effects model. This study is registered with The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with registration no.: CRD42021216370.

RESULTS

Of 923 unique records, 163 were reviewed in full. Three met inclusion criteria: one RCT and two retrospective cohorts. The included RCT (n = 50) and one cohort (n = 142) compared outcomes with and without adjunct use of antibiotic and tocolytic, while the second cohort (n = 150) compared outcomes with and without adjunct tocolytic, with a subpopulation also receiving antibiotics. The RCT was nested within one of the cohorts, and therefore only one of these two studies was utilized for any given outcome to eliminate counting individuals twice. Risk of bias was "critical" for one cohort study, "moderate" for the other cohort study, and "some concerns" for the RCT. Gestational latency could not be pooled and meta-analyzed. Adjunct tocolytic-antibiotic therapy was not associated with a decrease in risk of preterm delivery <28 weeks (relative risk [RR] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65-1.26; χ 2 = 0.0, I 2 = 0.0%) or neonatal survival to discharge (RR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.91-1.35; χ 2 = 0.05, I 2 = 0.0%).

CONCLUSION

There is not enough evidence to robustly evaluate the use of adjunct tocolytics or antibiotics at time of examination-indicated cerclage to prolong latency.

KEY POINTS

· Limited data on adjunct antibiotic tocolytics at cerclage.. · Widely variable practices at time of cerclage identified.. · Role of adjunct therapies at time of examination-indicated cerclage remains unclear..

Interventions for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth: a scoping review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Globally, 11% of babies are born preterm each year. Preterm birth (PTB) is a leading cause of neonatal death and under-five mortality and morbidity, with lifelong sequelae in those who survive. PTB disproportionately impacts low/middle-income countries (LMICs) where the burden is highest.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review sought to the evidence for interventions that reduce the risk of PTB, focusing on the evidence from LMICs and describing how context is considered in evidence synthesis.

DESIGN

We conducted a scoping review, to describe this wide topic area. We searched five electronic databases (2009-2020) and contacted experts to identify relevant systematic reviews of interventions to reduce the risk of PTB. We included published systematic reviews that examined the effectiveness of interventions and their effect on reducing the risk of PTB. Data were extracted and is described narratively.

RESULTS

139 published systematic reviews were included in the review. Interventions were categorised as primary or secondary. The interventions where the results showed a greater effect size and consistency across review findings included treatment of syphilis and vaginal candidiasis, vitamin D supplementation and cervical cerclage. Included in the 139 reviews were 1372 unique primary source studies. 28% primary studies were undertaken in LMIC contexts and only 4.5% undertaken in a low-income country (LIC) Only 10.8% of the reviews sought to explore the impact of context on findings, and 19.4% reviews did not report the settings or the primary studies.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review highlights the lack of research evidence derived from contexts where the burden of PTB globally is greatest. The lack of rigour in addressing contextual applicability within systematic review methods is also highlighted. This presents a risk of inappropriate and unsafe recommendations for practice within these contexts. It also highlights a need for primary research, developing and testing interventions in LIC settings.

Peripartum cardiomyopathy and acute heart failure associated with prolonged tocolytic therapy in pregnancy: A case report

RATIONALE

Peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) is a rare and sometimes fatal systolic heart failure that affects women during late pregnancy or the early postpartum period. Heart failure symptoms can mimic the physiological changes of normal pregnancy, and the diagnosis is based on echocardiography.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 38-year-old multiparous woman with a history of cervical incompetence underwent cervical cerclage and received tocolysis for 100 days.

DIAGNOSES

She delivered vaginally at 37 weeks of gestation but developed postpartum decompensated acute heart failure with low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF: 34%) and was diagnosed with PPCM.

INTERVENTIONS

She received standard therapy for acute heart failure.

OUTCOMES

The patient's pulmonary edema cleared, and she was fully ambulatory 6 days after admission. A follow-up echocardiogram 3 months later demonstrated recovery of LVEF to 66%.

LESSONS

Prolonged tocolysis may contribute to cardiomyopathy and should be used with caution. PPCM management requires standard treatments for acute heart failure with modifications for fetal safety.

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.

Pregnancy outcomes and superiorities of prophylactic cervical cerclage and therapeutic cervical cerclage in cervical insufficiency pregnant women

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical effect of prophylactic cervical cerclage and therapeutic cervical cerclage on pregnancy outcome and operative factors in cervical insufficiency pregnant women.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted between June 2014 and September 2016 in a maternity ward, which included women who have had a single pregnancy and have been carried out a McDonald cerclage. All maternal medical records were reviewed. The efficacy of cerclage for preventing late foetal loss was assessed using multivariable logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The results showed that there were significant associations between cerclage operations and pregnancy outcomes in the duration of pregnancy prolongation in terms of live births, gestation age, live birth and cesarean section rate. In prophylactic cervical cerclage, compared with therapeutic cervical cerclage, cervical length before surgery was significantly longer (32.7 ± 5.8 vs 19.9 ± 7.3 mm, p < 0.0001). Mean operative duration and postoperative length of hospital stay in prophylactic cervical cerclage were shorter than those in therapeutic cervical cerclage (22.1 ± 10.3 vs 28.9 ± 13.0 min, p = 0.0241 and 5.6 ± 1.8 vs 7.0 ± 2.8 days, p = 0.0354), respectively. Compared with therapeutic cerclage, prophylactic cerclage had more advantages in gestational age at delivery (35.2 ± 5.5 and 31.7 ± 6.5 weeks, p = 0.0061), deliveries < 37 gestational weeks (40 vs 69.2%, p = 0.0159), live births (93.3 vs 69.2%, p = 0.0143) and the duration of pregnancy prolongation in terms of live births (19.5 ± 5.0 vs 12.0 ± 8.2 weeks, p = 0.0002). There was a higher cesarean section rate in prophylactic group than that in therapeutic group (50 vs 25.6%, p = 0.0383). The logistic analysis showed that the cervical length before surgery was the only independent prognostic factor [OR 2.860 (1.425, 5.742) p = 0.0031] for pregnancy outcome, and that is the cervical length before surgery affected late foetal loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that, both prophylactic cervical cerclage and therapeutic cervical cerclage reduce the incidence of recurrent abortion or preterm birth and efficiently extend the length of the pregnancy with live births. The prophylactic cervical cerclage has more advantages in operative time, length of hospital stay after surgery, gestational age at delivery, live births and preterm birth. The length of the cervical before surgery is an independent risk factor for pregnancy outcomes when pregnant women appear in the cervical shortening is less than normal. Cervical cerclage is an effective surgical technique to prevent recurrent abortion or late foetal loss.

Effectiveness of elective cervical cerclage according to obstetric history

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of elective history-indicated cervical cerclage according to obstetrical history.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed pregnancy outcome of a retrospective cohort of women who have had history-indicated McDonald's cerclage. Principal outcome was gestational age (GA) at delivery.

RESULT

Between January 2003 and December 2013, 205 women were included. We analyzed population in two risk groups: 1- Low-risk (≤2 prior preterm birth (PTB)/second trimester loss (STL), or prior success of cerclage), 2- High risk (≥3 prior PTB/STL, or prior failure of cerclage). In the high-risk group, there was a higher frequency of deliveries before 37 weeks (47.5% vs. 24.5%, P=0.001, OR=2.79, 95% CI [1.49-5.23]). Fifty percent of women (n=6/12) delivered before 37 weeks in case of three or more prior PTB/STL, and 51% (n=24/47) in case of prior failure of cervical cerclage.

CONCLUSION

Elective cervical cerclage may be indicated for women with≤2 prior PTB/STL, or prior successful cerclage. For women with≥3 prior PTB/STL, trachelorraphy or cervico-isthmic cerclage could be possible alternatives to cervical cerclage.