Pessary Compared With Vaginal Progesterone for the Prevention of Preterm Birth in Women With Twin Pregnancies and Cervical Length Less Than 38 mm: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth and poor neonatal outcome: An integrity meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials focusing on adherence to the European Medical Device Regulation

BACKGROUND

Findings from randomized trials (RCTs) on cervical pessary treatment to prevent spontaneous preterm birth are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVES

Our hypothesis suggests that adhering to the European Medical Device Regulation (MDR) and following the instructions for use are essential prerequisites for successful therapy. Conversely, the non-adherence to these guidelines will probably contribute to its failure.

SEARCH STRATEGY AND SELECTION CRITERIA

Based on validated criteria from integrity assessments we performed a systematic review identifying 14 RCTs evaluating the effect of cervical pessaries.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We analyzed the implications of 14 criteria each accounting for 0-2 points of a score reflecting the clinical evaluation plan (CEP) as proposed by the MDR to evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of medical devices.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven RCTs in each singleton and twin pregnancies (5193 "cases") were included, detecting a high heterogeneity within control groups (I2 = 85% and 87%, respectively, P < 0.01). The CEP score varied from 11 to 26 points for all studies. The most common reasons for low scores and potential data compromise were poor recruitment rates, no (completed) power analysis, and no pre-registration, but mainly non-adherence to technical, biological, and clinical equivalence to the instructions for use as required by the MDR. All trials with score values greater than 20 had applied audit procedures. Within this group we found significantly reduced rates of spontaneous preterm birth at less than 34 weeks within the pessary group in singleton (odds ratio 0.28; 95% confidence interval 0.12-0.65) and twin pregnancies (odds ratio 0.30; 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.67). Similarly, there was a significant reduction in the composite poor neonatal outcome in singleton (odds ratio 0.25; 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.61) and twin pregnancies (odds ratio 0.54; 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.82) after a pessary as compared with controls.

CONCLUSION

Non-audited RCTs and meta-analyses mixing studies of different clinical quality as pre-defined by a CEP and the MDR pose the risk for erroneous conclusions.

Are Cervical Pessaries Effective in Preventing Preterm Birth?

Preterm births are a significant concern, as they can have serious consequences for both infants and mothers. It is crucial to identify risk factors associated with preterm birth and to implement effective interventions, such as progesterone, cervical pessary, and cervical cerclage, to prevent it. This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy of cervical pessary in reducing spontaneous preterm delivery. However, cervical pessaries have limited research and conflicting findings when compared to other interventions for preventing preterm labor. Therefore, this review seeks to analyze various studies to evaluate their overall effectiveness and better understand their role in treating this vulnerable population. The literature search was conducted using PubMed between January and September 2023, and the systematic review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The results of this review highlight the importance of continued research into mitigation strategies for preterm birth. There is some evidence that indicates that using cervical pessaries before 34 weeks can be effective. While some studies have reported positive outcomes when cervical pessaries are combined with other treatments like progesterone, there is no solid statistical evidence to support this claim. Furthermore, additional research is needed to comprehend the impact of singleton pregnancies and long-term outcomes for both mothers and infants.

Prevention and Therapy of Preterm Birth. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/025, September 2022) - Part 2 with Recommendations on the Tertiary Prevention of Preterm Birth and on the Management of Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes

Aim The revision of this guideline was coordinated by the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Austrian Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (OEGGG) and the Swiss Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (SGGG). The aim of the guideline is to improve the prediction, prevention and management of preterm birth based on evidence from the current literature, the experience of members of the guidelines commission, and the viewpoint of self-help organizations. Methods The members of the contributing professional societies and organizations developed recommendations and statements based on international literature. The recommendations and statements were presented and adopted using a formal process (structured consensus conferences with neutral moderation, written Delphi vote). Recommendations Part 2 of this short version of the guideline presents statements and recommendations on the tertiary prevention of preterm birth and the management of preterm premature rupture of membranes.

Progesterone, cerclage, pessary, or acetylsalicylic acid for prevention of preterm birth in singleton and multifetal pregnancies - A systematic review and meta-analyses

Background

Preterm birth is the leading cause of childhood mortality and morbidity. We aimed to provide a comprehensive systematic review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on progesterone, cerclage, pessary, and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic women with singleton pregnancies defined as risk of preterm birth and multifetal pregnancies.

Methods

Six databases (including PubMed, Embase, Medline, the Cochrane Library) were searched up to February 2022. RCTs published in English or Scandinavian languages were included through a consensus process. Abstracts and duplicates were excluded. The trials were critically appraised by pairs of reviewers. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for risk of bias assessment. Predefined outcomes including preterm birth, perinatal/neonatal/maternal mortality and morbidity, were pooled in meta-analyses using RevMan 5.4, stratified for high and low risk of bias trials. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The systematic review followed the PRISMA guideline.

Results

The search identified 2,309 articles, of which 87 were included in the assessment: 71 original RCTs and 16 secondary publications with 23,886 women and 32,893 offspring. Conclusions were based solely on trials with low risk of bias (n = 50).Singleton pregnancies: Progesterone compared with placebo, reduced the risk of preterm birth <37 gestational weeks: 26.8% vs. 30.2% (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.82 [95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.71 to 0.95]) (high certainty of evidence, 14 trials) thereby reducing neonatal mortality and respiratory distress syndrome. Cerclage probably reduced the risk of preterm birth <37 gestational weeks: 29.0% vs. 37.6% (RR 0.78 [95% CI 0.69 to 0.88]) (moderate certainty of evidence, four open trials). In addition, perinatal mortality may be reduced by cerclage. Pessary did not demonstrate any overall effect. ASA did not affect any outcome, but evidence was based on one underpowered study.Multifetal pregnancies: The effect of progesterone, cerclage, or pessary was minimal, if any. No study supported improved long-term outcome of the children.

Conclusion

Progesterone and probably also cerclage have a protective effect against preterm birth in asymptomatic women with a singleton pregnancy at risk of preterm birth. Further trials of ASA are needed. Prevention of preterm birth requires screening programs to identify women at risk of preterm birth.

Systematic Review Registration

[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42021234946].

The role of obstetric pessary and micronized progesteron in early preterm birth prevention in patients with multiple pregnancy

Background. Multiple pregnancy is a well-established risk factor for preterm birth. Prevention of early termination of pregnancy is a priority problem in obstetric practice.The aim. To evaluate the role of an obstetric pessary and micronized progesterone in the prevention of early preterm labor in patients with multiple pregnancies.Materials and methods. A prospective controlled study was conducted with the inclusion of 146 pregnant women with multiple pregnancies, which, depending on the methods of treatment, were divided into three groups: Group I (n = 67) – pregnant women who received micronized progesterone in combination with an obstetric pessary; Group II (n = 57) included women who received micronized progesterone; Group III (n = 22) consisted of patients with multiple pregnancies without therapy.Results. In Group I, the complex of an obstetric pessary and micronized progesterone allowed to reduce the frequency of preterm birth by 2.3 times (p = 0.008) in comparison with Group III, the frequency of births at gestational age ≤ 34 weeks – by 8.1 times (p = 0.005) in compared with Group III and 2.7 times (p < 0.01) compared with Group II. In 70.4 % of pregnant women, the use of a complex of an obstetric pessary with micronized progesterone made it possible to prevent the formation of isthmiccervical insufficiency, which, according to sonography, was expressed in the dynamics of the utero-cervical angle towards a more obtuse one.Conclusion. The use of an obstetric pessary with micronized progesterone made it possible to reduce the risks of isthmic-cervical insufficiency by 7.7 % compared with patients who received only micronized progesterone therapy, and by 17.1 % compared with pregnant women who did not receive therapy.

Patient’s experience with the Arabin cervical pessary during pregnancy: A questionnaire survey

Introduction

The cervical pessary is used in women with precocious cervical ripening to prevent preterm birth. Up to now however, there have been no systematic studies on compliance and tolerance, which vary among different study cohorts.

Material and methods

A questionnaire was administered to 166 women treated with the Arabin cervical pessary in one center. Data were analysed about the patient’s experience before insertion (adequacy of information received), during treatment (follow-up, impact on daily life, perceived discomfort, side effects) and at the time of removal (pain, if the patient’s expectations had been met regarding the treatment).

Results

Information received before the insertion of the Arabin cervical pessary was considered adequate in 163/166 (98.2%) women. An increase in vaginal discharge was experienced by 70/166 (42.2%) women. Discomfort or other side effects were reported in 13.8% and 16.3% of cases, respectively. Overall, 77% of women reported an improved quality of life and 94% considered the follow-up during pregnancy adequate. Removal was moderately painful for 58/166 (35%) of women. Patient’s expectations regarding the treatment were exceeded in the majority of cases (75.3%). In a final step, we compared our results to previous studies regarding the use of the pessary in singleton and twin pregnancies.

Conclusion

Although some trials report high rates of non-compliant patients, this could not be confirmed by our study. In contrast, most women reported having a positive experience and that they were motivated to continue the treatment when they were continuously followed by experienced clinicians.

Pessary Plus Progesterone to Prevent Preterm Birth in Women With Short Cervixes: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To test the effectiveness of cervical pessary in addition to vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth in women with midpregnancy short cervixes.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial in 17 perinatal centers. Asymptomatic women with singleton or twin pregnancies and cervical lengths of 30 mm or less, measured at 18 0/7-22 6/7 weeks of gestation, were randomized to cervical pessary plus vaginal progesterone (pessary plus progesterone group) or vaginal progesterone only (progesterone-only group) (200 mg/day). Treatments were used from randomization to 36 weeks of gestation or delivery. The primary outcome was a composite of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Secondary outcomes were delivery before 37 weeks and before 34 weeks of gestation. Analysis was performed according to intention to treat.

RESULTS

Between July 9, 2015, and March 29, 2019, 8,168 women were screened, of whom 475 were randomized to pessary and 461 to progesterone only. The composite perinatal outcome occurred in 19.2% (89/463) of the women in the pessary group compared with 20.9% (91/436) of the women in the progesterone-only group (adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 0.88, 95% CI 0.69-1.12). Delivery rates before 37 weeks of gestation were 29.1% compared with 31.4% (aRR 0.86, 95% CI 0.72-1.04); delivery rates before 34 weeks were 9.9% compared with 13.9% (aRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47-0.93). Women in the pessary group had more vaginal discharge (51.6% [245/476] vs 25.4% [117/479] [P<.001]), pain (33.1% [157/476] vs 24.1% [111/479] [P=.002]), and vaginal bleeding (9.7% [46/476] vs 4.8% [22/479] [P=.004]).

CONCLUSION

In asymptomatic women with short cervixes, the combination of pessary and progesterone did not decrease rates of neonatal morbidity or mortality when compared with progesterone only.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Brazilian Clinical Trial Registry (ReBec), UTN:U1111-1164-2636.

Number and quality of randomized controlled trials in obstetrics published in the top general medical and obstetrics and gynecology journals

BACKGROUND

There has been an increasing number of randomized controlled trials published in obstetrics and maternal-fetal medicine to reduce biases of treatment effect and to provide insights on the cause-effect of the relationship between treatment and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify obstetrical randomized controlled trials published in top weekly general medical journals and monthly obstetrics and gynecology journals, to assess their quality in reporting and identify factors associated with publication in different journals.

STUDY DESIGN

The 4 weekly medical journals with the highest 2019 impact factor (New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and British Medical Journal), the top 4 monthly obstetrics and gynecology journals with obstetrics-related research (American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, Obstetrics & Gynecology, and the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology), and the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Maternal-Fetal Medicine were searched for obstetrical randomized controlled trials in the years 2018 to 2020. The primary outcome was the number of obstetrical randomized controlled trials published in the obstetrics and gynecology journals vs the weekly medical journals and the percentage of trials published, overall and per journal. The secondary outcomes included the proportion of positive vs negative trials overall and per journal and the assessment of the study characteristics of published trials, including quality assessment criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 4024 original research articles published in the 9 journals during the 3-year study period, 1221 (30.3%) were randomized controlled trials, with 137 (11.2%) randomized controlled trials being in obstetrics (46 in 2018, 47 in 2019, and 44 studies in 2020). Furthermore, 33 (24.1%) were published in weekly medical journals, and 104 (75.9%) were published in obstetrics and gynecology journals. The percentage of obstetrical randomized controlled trials published ranged from 1.5% to 9.6% per journal. Overall, 34.3% of obstetrical trials were statistically significant or "positive" for the primary outcome. Notably, 24.8% of the trials were retrospectively registered after the enrollment of the first study patient. Trials published in the 4 weekly medical journals enrolled significantly more patients (1801 vs 180; P<.001), received more often funding from the federal government (78.8% vs 35.6%; P<.001), and were more likely to be multicenter (90.9% vs 42.3%; P<.001), non-United States based (69.7% vs 49.0%; P=.03), and double blinded (45.5% vs 18.3%; P=.003) than trials published in the obstetrics and gynecology journals. There was no difference in study type (noninferiority vs superiority) and trial quality characteristics, including pretrial registration, ethics approval statement, informed consent statement, and adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines statement between studies published in weekly medical journals and studies published in obstetrics and gynecology journals.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 45 trials in obstetrics are being published every year in the highest impact journals, with one-fourth being in the weekly medical journals and the remainder in the obstetrics and gynecology journals. Only about a third of published obstetrical trials are positive. Trials published in weekly medical journals are larger, more likely to be funded by the government, multicenter, international, and double blinded. Quality metrics are similar between weekly medical journals and obstetrics and gynecology journals.

Special Considerations Regarding Antenatal Care and Pregnancy Complications in Dichorionic Twin Pregnancies

Twin pregnancies account for about 3.3% of all deliveries in the United States with the majority of them being dichorionic diamniotic (DCDA). Maternal physiological adaption in twin pregnancies is exaggerated and the rate of almost every maternal and fetal complication is higher when compared to singleton pregnancies. Therefore, twin pregnancies necessitate closer antenatal surveillance by care providers who are familiar with the specific challenges unique to these pregnancies, and there is evidence that following women with twins in a specialized twin clinic can result in improved obstetrical outcomes. The importance of the first antenatal visit in twin pregnancies cannot be over emphasized and should preferably take place early in gestation as it is the optimal period to correctly identify the number of fetuses and the type of placentation (chorionicity and amnionicity). This will allow the patients, families, and caregivers to make the appropriate modifications and to tailor an optimal antenatal follow-up plan. This plan should focus on general recommendations such as weight gain and level of activity, education regarding complications specific to twin pregnancies along with the relevant symptoms and indications to seek care, as well as on close maternal and fetal monitoring. In this review, we summarize available evidence and current guidelines regarding antenatal care in DCDA twin pregnancies.

FIGO good practice recommendations on the use of pessary for reducing the frequency and improving outcomes of preterm birth

A pessary is a device made of synthetic material that is placed in the vagina and has been used for prevention of preterm birth. It has been suggested that a potential mechanism of the pessary is alteration of the cervico-uterine angle to a more posterior position, which reduces cervical compression in women with a singleton pregnancy and a short cervical length. Pessaries should not be used in routine clinical care to reduce the frequency of preterm birth or to improve outcomes (e.g. neonatal outcomes) related to preterm birth. In women with a twin pregnancy-regardless of cervical length-pessaries should not be used in routine clinical care to reduce the frequency of preterm birth or to improve outcomes (e.g. neonatal outcomes) related to preterm birth. Presently there is no sufficient evidence suggesting that pessaries should be used as a standard treatment to prevent preterm birth; their use should be reserved for study populations.

Development and external validation of a nomogram for predicting preterm birth at < 32 weeks in twin pregnancy

The purpose of this study was to develop a dynamic model to predict the risk of spontaneous preterm birth at < 32 weeks in twin pregnancy. A retrospective clinical study of consecutively asymptomatic women with twin pregnancies from January 2017 to December 2019 in two tertiary medical centres was performed. Data from one centre were used to construct the model, and data from the other were used to evaluate the model. Data on maternal demographic characteristics, transvaginal cervical length and funnelling during 20-24 weeks were extracted. The prediction model was constructed with independent variables determined by multivariate logistic regression analyses. After applying specified exclusion criteria, an algorithm with maternal and biophysical factors was developed based on 88 twin pregnancies with a preterm birth < 32 weeks and 639 twin pregnancies with a delivery ≥ 32 weeks. It was then evaluated among 34 pregnancies with a preterm birth < 32 weeks and 252 pregnancies with a delivery ≥ 32 weeks in a second tertiary centre without specific training. The model reached a sensitivity of 80.00%, specificity of 88.17%, positive predictive value of 50.33% and negative predictive value of 96.71%; ROC characteristics proved that the model was superior to any single parameter with an AUC of 0.848 (all P < 0.005). We developed and validated a dynamic nomogram model to predict the individual probability of early preterm birth to better represent the complex aetiology of twin pregnancies and hopefully improve the prediction and indication of interventions.

Role of progesterone, cerclage and pessary in preventing preterm birth in twin pregnancies: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the role of progesterone, pessary and cervical cerclage in reducing the risk of (preterm birth) PTB in twin pregnancies and compare these interventions using pairwise and network meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN

Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases were explored. The inclusion criteria were studies in which twin pregnancies were randomized to an intervention for the prevention of PTB (any type of progesterone, cervical cerclage, cervical pessary, or any combination of these) or to a control group (e.g. placebo or treatment as usual). Interventions of interest were either progesterone [vaginal or oral natural progesterone or intramuscular 17a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC)], cerclage (McDonald or Shirodkar), or cervical pessary. The primary outcome was PTB < 34 weeks of gestation. Both primary and secondary outcomes were explored in an unselected population of twin pregnancies and in women at higher risk of PTB (defined as those with cervical length <25 mm). Random-effect head-to-head and a multiple-treatment meta-analyses were used to analyze the data and results expressed as risk ratios.

RESULTS

26 studies were included in the meta-analysis. When considering an unselected population of twin pregnancies, vaginal progesterone, intra-muscular17-OHPC or pessary did not reduce the risk of PTB < 34 weeks of gestation (all p > 0.05). When stratifying the analysis for spontaneous PTB, neither pessary, vaginal or intramuscular 17-OHPC were associated with a significant reduction in the risk of PTB compared to controls (all p > 0.05), while there was no study on cerclage which explored this outcome in an unselected population of twin pregnancies. When considering twin pregnancies with short cervical length (≤25 mm), there was no contribution of either pessary, vaginal progesterone, intra-muscular 17-OHPC or cerclage in reducing the risk of overall PTB < 34 weeks of gestation.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical pessary, progesterone and cerclage do not show a significant effect in reducing the rate of PTB or perinatal morbidity in twins, either when these interventions are applied to an unselected population of twins or in pregnancies with a short cervix.

Prevention of preterm birth in multiples

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Multifetal pregnancy carries increased risk of preterm delivery, and consensus on management options to prevent early birth in this population has not been reached. This review serves to summarize the most contemporary findings on this controversial topic.

RECENT FINDINGS

Examination-indicated cerclage is effective in reducing preterm birth in twin pregnancies, whereas cerclages for other indications are less convincing. Cervical pessary may be beneficial for patients with a short cervix and in those who have had threatened preterm labor. Progesterone supplementation for multifetal gestation alone is not beneficial, but it can be considered in those with a history of prior singleton preterm birth.

SUMMARY

Interventions for preterm birth prevention in multiple gestations remain under investigation, and further data is required in order to reach consensus for this high-risk population.

Cervical Pessary Plus Progesterone for Twin Pregnancy with Short Cervix Compared to Unselected and Non-Treated Twin Pregnancy: A Historical Equivalence Cohort Study (EPM Twin Pessary Study)

OBJECTIVE

 The present study aims to determine if the use of cervical pessary plus progesterone in short-cervix (≤ 25 mm) dichorionic-diamniotic (DC-DA) twin pregnancies is equivalent to the rate of preterm births (PBs) with no intervention in unselected DC-DA twin pregnancies.

METHODS

 A historical cohort study was performed between 2010 and 2018, including a total of 57 pregnant women with DC-DA twin pregnancies. The women admitted from 2010 to 2012 (n = 32) received no treatment, and were not selected by cervical length (Non-Treated group, NTG), whereas those admitted from 2013 to 2018 (n = 25), were routinely submitted to cervical pessary plus progesterone after the diagnosis of short cervix from the 18th to the 27th weeks of gestation (Pessary-Progesterone group, PPG). The primary outcome analyzed was the rate of PBs before 34 weeks.

RESULTS

 There were no statistical differences between the NTG and the PPG regarding PB < 34 weeks (18.8% versus 40.0% respectively; p = 0.07) and the mean birthweight of the smallest twin (2,037 ± 425 g versus 2,195 ± 665 g; p = 0.327). The Kaplan-Meyer Survival analysis was performed, and there were no differences between the groups before 31.5 weeks. Logistic regression showed that a previous PB (< 37 weeks) presented an odds ratio (OR) of 15.951 (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 1.294-196.557; p = 0.031*) for PB < 34 weeks in the PPG.

CONCLUSION

 In DC-DA twin pregnancies with a short cervix, (which means a higher risk of PB), the treatment with cervical pessary plus progesterone could be considered equivalent in several aspects related to PB in the NTG, despite the big difference between these groups.

Cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials that have assessed the efficacy of cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth in asymptomatic high-risk women have reported conflicting results.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in asymptomatic high-risk women.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, POPLINE, CINAHL, and LILACS (from their inception to October 31, 2019), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials that compared cervical pessary with standard care (no pessary) or alternative interventions in asymptomatic women at high risk for preterm birth.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook guidelines. The primary outcome was spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse pregnancy, maternal, and perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (4687 women and 7167 fetuses/infants) met the inclusion criteria: 8 evaluated pessary vs no pessary in women with a short cervix, 2 assessed pessary vs no pessary in unselected multiple gestations, and 2 compared pessary vs vaginal progesterone in women with a short cervix. There were no significant differences between the pessary and no pessary groups in the risk of spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation among singleton gestations with a cervical length ≤25 mm (relative risk, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-1.49; 6 trials, 1982 women; low-quality evidence), unselected twin gestations (relative risk, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.41; 1 trial, 1177 women; moderate-quality evidence), twin gestations with a cervical length <38 mm (relative risk, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-1.36; 3 trials, 1128 women; low-quality evidence), and twin gestations with a cervical length ≤25 mm (relative risk; 0.72, 95% confidence interval, 0.25-2.06; 2 trials, 348 women; low-quality evidence). Overall, no significant differences were observed between the pessary and no pessary groups in preterm birth <37, <32, and <28 weeks of gestation, and most adverse pregnancy, maternal, and perinatal outcomes (low- to moderate-quality evidence for most outcomes). There were no significant differences in the risk of spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation between pessary and vaginal progesterone in singleton gestations with a cervical length ≤25 mm (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.83; 1 trial, 246 women; low-quality evidence) and twin gestations with a cervical length <38 mm (relative risk, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-1.18; 1 trial, 297 women; very low-quality evidence). Vaginal discharge was significantly more frequent in the pessary group than in the no pessary and vaginal progesterone groups (relative risks, ∼2.20; high-quality evidence).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence does not support the use of cervical pessary to prevent preterm birth or to improve perinatal outcomes in singleton or twin gestations with a short cervix and in unselected twin gestations.

Effectiveness of cervical pessary compared to cervical cerclage with or without vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth in women with twin pregnancies and a short cervix: study protocol for a two-by-two factorial randomised clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Women with twin pregnancies and a short cervix are at increased risk for preterm birth (PTB). Given the burden of prematurity and its attendant risks, the quest for effective interventions in twins has been an area of considerable research. Studies investigating the effectiveness of cervical cerclage, cervical pessary and vaginal progesterone in preventing PTB have yielded conflicting results. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of cervical pessary and cervical cerclage with or without vaginal progesterone to prevent PTB in women with twin pregnancies and a cervical length (CL) ≤ 28 mm.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre, randomised clinical trial will be conducted at My Duc Hospital and My Duc Phu Nhuan Hospital, Vietnam. Asymptomatic women with twin pregnancies and a CL ≤28 mm, measured at 16-22 weeks' gestation, will be randomised in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive a cerclage, pessary, cerclage plus progesterone or pessary plus progesterone. Primary outcome will be PTB <34 weeks. Secondary outcomes will be maternal and neonatal complications. We preplanned a subgroup analysis according to CL from all women after randomisation and divided into four quartiles. Analysis will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. The rate of PTB <34 weeks' gestation in women with twin pregnancies and a cervix ≤28 mm and treated with pessary in our previous study at My Duc Hospital was 24.2%. A sample size of 340 women will be required to show or refute that cervical cerclage decreases the rate of PTB <34 weeks by 50% compared with pessary (from 24.2% to 12.1%, α level 0.05, power 80%, 5% lost to follow-up and protocol deviation). This study is not to be powered to assess interactions between interventions.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of My Duc Hospital and informed patient consent was obtained before study enrolment. Results of the study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03863613 (date of registration: 4 March 2019).

Is the Arabin Pessary really useful in preventing preterm birth? A review of literature

The aim of this review is to describe the state of the art in the use of Arabin Pessary for the prevention of spontaneous preterm birth (SPTB). We conducted a review of the literature in order to collect relevant studies concerning the efficacy of Arabin Pessary in preventing preterm birth, also considering it in addition or in comparison with other methods such as cervical cerclage or vaginal progesterone and in both singleton and twin pregnancy. Despite the large number of studies available there is not a clear consensus about the superiority of one of this methods over the others. In addition to this, although Arabin Pessary is widely used in clinical practice, no guidelines for management and use of cervical pessary during pregnancy have been assessed.

The predictors of preterm labour in patients with multiple pregnancy

Introduction. The number of women with multiple pregnancy is increasing worldwide, especially in countries with a high level of health care, where assisted reproductive technologies are widely used. According to foreign studies, one third of twins are born as a result of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART), so only an increase in multiple pregnancy can be predicted in the future. The main obstetric problem with these pregnancies is the problem of carrying.

Objective: To identify the predictors of preterm birth in patients with multiple pregnancy in order to improve monitoring and prophylactic measures among this cohort of women.

Material and methods: A retrospective controlled observational study, including 154 patients with multiple pregnancies was carried out. Logistic analysis was used to identify the predictors of preterm labour.

Results: The study showed that the predictors of preterm birth varied from one trimester to another. Based on the identified predictors, the predictive models for each trimester of pregnancy were compiled. Most of the identified predictors are related to obstetrical history. Risk groups formation, based on the identification of these predictors, is extremely important for qualified medical support. Prophylactic measures should be performed on the pre-conceptional stage. Pregnancy planning should be recommended only after treatment of chronic endometritis, followed by control of vaginal microflora and progesterone support. It is hardly possible to talk about the prevention of cervical insufficiency. However, cervical correction is an important factor for perinatal outcomes improving. The research suggests that the insertion of cervical pessary in women with multiple pregnancy and cervical insufficiency allows to prolong the gestational period for 7 weeks.

Conclusion: a comprehensive approach of management of women with multiple pregnancy based on the prognostic scales of preterm labour, allows to reduce the preterm birth rate.

Cervical pessary vs vaginal progesterone for prevention of preterm birth in women with twin pregnancy and short cervix: economic analysis following randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cost-effectiveness of cervical pessary vs vaginal progesterone to prevent preterm birth and neonatal morbidity in women with twin pregnancy and a short cervix.

METHODS

Between 4 March 2016 and 3 June 2017, we performed this economic analysis following a randomized controlled trial (RCT), performed at My Duc Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, that compared cervical pessary to vaginal progesterone in women with twin pregnancy and cervical length < 38 mm between 16 and 22 weeks of gestation. We used morbidity-free neonatal survival as a measure of effectiveness. Data on pregnancy outcome, maternal morbidity and neonatal complications were collected prospectively from medical files; additional information was obtained via telephone interviews with the patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated as the incremental cost required to achieve one extra surviving morbidity-free neonate in the pessary group compared with in the progesterone group. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

During the study period, we screened 1113 women with twin pregnancy, of whom 300 fulfilled the inclusion criteria of the RCT and gave informed consent to participate. These women were assigned randomly to receive cervical pessary (n = 150) or vaginal progesterone (n = 150), with two women and one woman, respectively, being lost to follow-up. The rate of morbidity-free neonatal survival was significantly higher in the pessary group compared with the progesterone group (n = 241/296 (81.4%) vs 219/298 (73.5%); relative risk, 1.11 (95% CI, 1.02-1.21), P = 0.02). The mean total cost per woman was 3146 € in the pessary group vs 3570 € in the progesterone group (absolute difference, -424 € (95% CI, -842 to -3 €), P = 0.048). The cost per morbidity-free neonate was significantly lower in the pessary group compared with that in the progesterone group (2492 vs 2639 €; absolute difference, -147 € (95% CI, -284 to 10 €), P = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

In women with twin pregnancy and a short cervix, cervical pessary improves significantly the rate of morbidity-free neonatal survival while reducing costs, as compared with vaginal progesterone. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Comparison of management options for twin pregnancies with cervical shortening

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of expectant management (EM), cervical cerclage (CC) and vaginal progesterone (VP) in decreasing the rate of spontaneous preterm birth in twin gestations with midtrimester cervical shortening.Study design: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing pregnancy outcomes of twin gestations with midtrimester cervical shortening, defined as a cervical length (CL) on routine transvaginal ultrasound between 15 weeks 0 days and 24 weeks 6 days gestation of <2.5 cm, managed with either EM, CC or VP. Women were categorized by final management strategy. Primary outcome was gestational age at delivery. Secondary outcomes included latency period (defined as number of weeks between a diagnosis of cervical shortening and delivery), gestational age at delivery <32 weeks, mode of delivery, perinatal death, neonatal birthweight and rate of chorioamnionitis. Subanalysis of women with a CL < 1.5 cm was also performed. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of delivery <32 weeks, controlling for potential confounders.Results: Between January 2006 and July 2016, 64 pairs of twins with midtrimester cervical shortening were identified, 18 managed with EM (28.1%), 29 CC (45.3%), and 17 VP (26.6%), 52 of which had information regarding delivery outcomes. 90.4% of women delivered prematurely (<37 weeks). Women in the CC group were diagnosed with cervical shortening at a significantly earlier mean gestational age (CC 20.6 ± 1.7 weeks versus EM 22.2 ± 2.9 weeks and VP 22.2 ± 2.0 weeks, p = .02) and had a shorter mean cervical length at the time of diagnosis (CC 1.18 ± 0.7 cm vs. EM 1.56 ± 0.7 and VP 1.95 ± 0.6, p = .002), as compared to those in the EM and VP groups. There was no difference in gestational age at delivery (EM 30.9 ± 5.2 weeks, CC 30.4 ± 4.9 weeks and VP 32.4 ± 4.1 weeks, respectively) or any of the secondary outcomes listed above. Women with a CL <1.5 cm delivered significantly earlier than those with a cervical length ≥1.5 cm (28.4 ± 4.7 weeks vs. 33.2 ± 3.6 weeks, p = .0001). After adjusting for potential confounders, cervical length <1.5 cm, not the management strategy, was the predictor of PTB before 32 weeks in this twin population [AOR 6.56 (95% CI 1.78, 24.20), p = .005].Conclusion: Twin pregnancies with midtrimester cervical shortening are at high risk for preterm delivery, and outcomes were similar regardless of management strategy. Large prospective trials are needed to evaluate the effect of different management strategies for cervical shortening in twins.

The impact of a short cervix and funneling on the outcome in singleton pregnancies treated with an Arabin-pessary or a McDonald cerclage

OBJECTIVE

The presence of sonographic funneling is a co-predictor of spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB). The aim of this study was to assess the outcome in patients with a short cervix and funneling after a McDonald cerclage or an Arabin pessary.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data of 238 singleton pregnancies with cervical shortening <25 mm subclassified by either isolated cervical shortening (n = 105) or cervical shortening and additional funneling (n = 133). In the group of isolated cervical shortening, a total of 93 patients had received a cervical pessary and 12 had McDonald cerclage. In the group of patients with additional funneling, 98 had received a cervical pessary and 35 had a cerclage. We evaluated PTB rates <28, <32, <34, and <37 weeks as well as prolongation of gestation, birth weight, and admission to NICU.

RESULTS

In the pessary groups (n = 191), funneling resulted in a significantly higher rate of PTB before 34 weeks as compared to patients with isolated cervical shortening (26.5 versus 8.6%, p=.0066). Similarly, in the cerclage groups (n = 47), funneling resulted in an absolute increase of PTB, albeit not significant (37.1 versus 0%, p=.1435) due to the smaller number. There were no significant differences in terms of prevention of PTB before 34 weeks in patients treated with pessary or cerclage, neither in the group of patients with isolated shortening nor in the group of patients with additional funneling (p=.9771 and p=.3916, respectively). However, in patients with funneling, we demonstrated a significantly lower neonatal admission rate in the pessary arm (n = 27, 27.6%) as compared to the cerclage arm (n = 31, 88.6%) (p = .0002). Similarly, the NICU admission time was shorter in both pessary groups -with and without funneling - as compared to patients treated with cerclage (p = .0000).

CONCLUSION

Pessary placement and cerclage should optimally be considered before the presence of funneling. Furthermore, there were lower rates of neonatal admission during pregnancy and a shorter admission time of babies after birth when mothers received a cervical pessary as compared to the group with cervical cerclage.