Prostacyclin and thromboxane levels in women with severe preeclampsia undergoing magnesium sulfate therapy during antepartum and postpartum periods

Alternative magnesium sulphate regimens for women with pre-eclampsia and eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Magnesium sulphate is the drug of choice for the prevention and treatment of women with eclampsia. Regimens for administration of this drug have evolved over the years, but there is no clarity on the comparative benefits or harm of alternative regimens. This is an update of a review first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess if one magnesium sulphate regimen is better than another when used for the care of women with pre-eclampsia or eclampsia, or both, to reduce the risk of severe morbidity and mortality for the woman and her baby.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (29 April 2022), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials and cluster-randomised trials comparing different regimens for administration of magnesium sulphate used in women with pre-eclampsia or eclampsia, or both. Comparisons included different dose regimens, intramuscular versus intravenous route for maintenance therapy, and different durations of therapy. We excluded studies with quasi-random or cross-over designs. We included abstracts of conference proceedings if compliant with the trustworthiness assessment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, two review authors assessed trials for inclusion, performed risk of bias assessment, and extracted data. We checked data for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update, a total of 16 trials (3020 women) met our inclusion criteria: four trials (409 women) compared regimens for women with eclampsia, and 12 trials (2611 women) compared regimens for women with pre-eclampsia. Most of the included trials had small sample sizes and were conducted in low- and middle-income countries. Eleven trials reported adequate randomisation and allocation concealment. Blinding of participants and clinicians was not possible in most trials. The included studies were for the most part at low risk of attrition and reporting bias. Treatment of women with eclampsia (four comparisons) One trial compared a loading dose-alone regimen with a loading dose plus maintenance dose regimen (80 women). It is uncertain whether either regimen has an effect on the risk of recurrence of convulsions or maternal death (very low-certainty evidence). One trial compared a lower-dose regimen with standard-dose regimen over 24 hours (72 women). It is uncertain whether either regimen has an effect on the risk of recurrence of convulsion, severe morbidity, perinatal death, or maternal death (very low-certainty evidence). One trial (137 women) compared intravenous (IV) versus standard intramuscular (IM) maintenance regimen. It is uncertain whether either route has an effect on recurrence of convulsions, death of the baby before discharge (stillbirth and neonatal death), or maternal death (very low-certainty evidence). One trial (120 women) compared a short maintenance regimen with a standard (24 hours after birth) maintenance regimen. It is uncertain whether the duration of the maintenance regimen has an effect on recurrence of convulsions, severe morbidity, or side effects such as nausea and respiratory failure. A short maintenance regimen may reduce the risk of flushing when compared to a standard 24 hours maintenance regimen (risk ratio (RR) 0.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.08 to 0.93; 1 trial, 120 women; low-certainty evidence). Many of our prespecified critical outcomes were not reported in the included trials. Prevention of eclampsia for women with pre-eclampsia (five comparisons) Two trials (462 women) compared loading dose alone with loading dose plus maintenance therapy. Low-certainty evidence suggests an uncertain effect with either regimen on the risk of eclampsia (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.61 to 6.54; 2 trials, 462 women) or perinatal death (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.36; 2 trials, 462 women). One small trial (17 women) compared an IV versus IM maintenance regimen for 24 hours. It is uncertain whether IV or IM maintenance regimen has an effect on eclampsia or stillbirth (very low-certainty evidence). Four trials (1713 women) compared short postpartum maintenance regimens with continuing for 24 hours after birth. Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be a wide range of benefit or harm between groups regarding eclampsia (RR 1.99, 95% CI 0.18 to 21.87; 4 trials, 1713 women). Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be little or no effect on severe morbidity (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.29; 2 trials, 1233 women) or side effects such as respiratory depression (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.61; 2 trials, 1424 women). Three trials (185 women) compared a higher-dose maintenance regimen versus a lower-dose maintenance regimen. It is uncertain whether either regimen has an effect on eclampsia (very low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence suggests that a higher-dose maintenance regimen has little or no effect on side effects when compared to a lower-dose regimen (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.01; 1 trial 62 women). One trial (200 women) compared a maintenance regimen by continuous infusion versus a serial IV bolus regimen. It is uncertain whether the duration of the maintenance regimen has an effect on eclampsia, side effects, perinatal death, maternal death, or other neonatal morbidity (very low-certainty evidence). Many of our prespecified critical outcomes were not reported in the included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the number of trials evaluating various magnesium sulphate regimens for eclampsia prophylaxis and treatment, there is still no compelling evidence that one particular regimen is more effective than another. Well-designed randomised controlled trials are needed to answer this question.

New Ideas for the Prevention and Treatment of Preeclampsia and Their Molecular Inspirations

Preeclampsia (PE) is a pregnancy-specific disorder affecting 4-10% of all expectant women. It greatly increases the risk of maternal and foetal death. Although the main symptoms generally appear after week 20 of gestation, scientific studies indicate that the mechanism underpinning PE is initiated at the beginning of gestation. It is known that the pathomechanism of preeclampsia is strongly related to inflammation and oxidative stress, which influence placentation and provoke endothelial dysfunction in the mother. However, as of yet, no "key players" regulating all these processes have been discovered. This might be why current therapeutic strategies intended for prevention or treatment are not fully effective, and the only effective method to stop the disease is the premature induction of delivery, mostly by caesarean section. Therefore, there is a need for further research into new pharmacological strategies for the treatment and prevention of preeclampsia. This review presents new preventive methods and therapies for PE not yet recommended by obstetrical and gynaecological societies. As many of these therapies are in preclinical studies or under evaluation in clinical trials, this paper reports the molecular targets of the tested agents or methods.

Infants at risk of cerebral palsy: a systematic review of outcomes used in Cochrane studies of pregnancy, childbirth and neonatology

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review meta-analyses (MAs) and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions for infants at risk of cerebral palsy (CP), to determine if consensus exists in study end-points.

METHODS

MAs within the "Neonatal" and "Pregnancy and Childbirth" Review Groups in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to June 2011) were included if they contained risk factors for CP as a study end-point, and were either published in 2010 or 2011 or cited >20 times in Sciverse Scopus. Up to 20 RCTs from each MA were included. Outcome measures, definitions and cut-points for ordinal groupings were extracted from MAs and RCTs and frequencies calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-two MAs and 165 RCTs were appraised. High consistency existed in types of outcome domains listed as important in MAs. For 10/16 most frequently cited outcome domains, <50% of RCTs contributed data for meta-analyses. Low consistency in outcome definitions, measures, cut-points in RCTs and long-term follow-up prohibited data aggregation.

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in outcome measurement and long-term follow up has hampered the ability of RCTs to contribute data on important outcomes for CP, resulting in lost opportunities to measure the impact of maternal and neonatal interventions. There is an urgent need for and long-term follow up of these interventions and an agreed set of standardised and clinically relevant common data elements for study end-points.

Magnesium sulphate and other anticonvulsants for women with pre-eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Eclampsia, the occurrence of a seizure (fit) in association with pre-eclampsia, is rare but potentially life-threatening. Magnesium sulphate is the drug of choice for treating eclampsia. This review assesses its use for preventing eclampsia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of magnesium sulphate, and other anticonvulsants, for prevention of eclampsia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (4 June 2010), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing anticonvulsants with placebo or no anticonvulsant, or comparisons of different drugs, for pre-eclampsia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 trials. Six (11,444 women) compared magnesium sulphate with placebo or no anticonvulsant: magnesium sulphate more than a halved the risk of eclampsia (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.58; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 100, 95% CI 50 to 100), with a non-significant reduction in maternal death (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.10) but no clear difference in serious maternal morbidity (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.32). It reduced the risk of placental abruption (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.83; NNTB 100, 95% CI 50 to 1000), and increased caesarean section (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.10). There was no clear difference in stillbirth or neonatal death (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.15). Side effects, primarily flushing, were more common with magnesium sulphate (24% versus 5%; RR 5.26, 95% CI 4.59 to 6.03; number need to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 6, 95% CI 5 to 6).Follow-up was reported by one trial comparing magnesium sulphate with placebo: for 3375 women there was no clear difference in death (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.53) or morbidity potentially related to pre-eclampsia (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.26) (median follow-up 26 months); for 3283 children exposed in utero there was no clear difference in death (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.84) or neurosensory disability (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.58) at age 18 months.Magnesium sulphate reduced eclampsia compared to phenytoin (three trials, 2291 women; RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.60) and nimodipine (one trial, 1650 women; RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.77).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Magnesium sulphate more than halves the risk of eclampsia, and probably reduces maternal death. There is no clear effect on outcome after discharge from hospital. A quarter of women report side effects with magnesium sulphate.

Alternative magnesium sulphate regimens for women with pre-eclampsia and eclampsia

BACKGROUND

Magnesium sulphate remains the drug of choice for both prevention and treatment of women with eclampsia. Regimens for administration of this drug have evolved over the years, but have not yet been formally evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effects of alternative regimens for the administration of magnesium sulphate when used for the care of women with pre-eclampsia or eclampsia, or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (June 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing different regimens for administration of magnesium sulphate used for the care of women with pre-eclampsia or eclampsia, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All four review authors assessed trial quality and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 17 studies of which six (866 women) met the inclusion criteria: two trials (451 women) compared regimens for women with eclampsia and four (415 women) for women with pre-eclampsia.Treatment of eclampsia: one trial compared loading dose alone with loading dose plus maintenance therapy for 24 hours (401 women). There was no clear difference between the groups in the risk ratio (RR) of recurrence of convulsions (RR 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 3.05) or stillbirth (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.92), and the CIs are wide. One trial compared a low dose regimen with a standard dose regimen over 24 hours (50 women). This study was too small for any reliable conclusions about the comparative effects.Prevention of eclampsia: one trial compared intravenous with intramuscular maintenance regimen for 24 hours (17 women). This trial was too small for any reliable conclusions. Three trials compared short maintenance regimens postpartum with continuing for 24 hours after the birth (398 women), even taken together these trials were too small for any reliable conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although strong evidence supports the use of magnesium sulphate for prevention and treatment of eclampsia, trials comparing alternative treatment regimens are too small for reliable conclusions.

Current world literature

This bibliography is compiled by clinicians from the journals listed at the end of this publication. It is based on literature entered into our database between 1 February 2008 and 31 January 2009 (articles are generally added to the database about two and a half months after publication). In addition, the bibliography contains every paper annotated by reviewers; these references were obtained from a variety of bibliographic databases and published between the beginning of the review period and the time of going to press. The bibliography has been grouped into topics that relate to the reviews in this issue.