The efficacy of three regimes of uterotonic agents for prevention of postpartum blood loss at undergoing cesarean section: a prospective randomized clinical trial.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Ginekologia polska Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-29 DOI:10.5603/gpl.93374
Çağlar Çetin, Hanife Rana Dural, Pınar Özcan, Fatma Başak Tanoğlu, Mehmet Serdar Kütük, Özge Pasin, Seda Ateş
{"title":"The efficacy of three regimes of uterotonic agents for prevention of postpartum blood loss at undergoing cesarean section: a prospective randomized clinical trial.","authors":"Çağlar Çetin, Hanife Rana Dural, Pınar Özcan, Fatma Başak Tanoğlu, Mehmet Serdar Kütük, Özge Pasin, Seda Ateş","doi":"10.5603/gpl.93374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the efficacy of three regimes of uterotonic agents on PPH in women undergoing cesarean section in our RCT.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This study was a randomized controlled study (NCT05083910) performed at the Bezmialem Vakif University between July 2021 and January 2022. All women were randomly allocated into three groups: Group I (n = 52) - oxytocin only; Group II (n = 52) - the combination of oxytocin plus intrauterine misoprostol; Group III (n = 52) - carbetocin only. The primary outcome measures were: PPH to evaluate with the change between the concentrations of preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin, hematocrit and intraoperative blood loss.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The blood loss characteristics, including the change in hemoglobin and the change in hematocrit concentration, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative additional hemostatic uterine sutures and the need for additional uterotonics, were lowest in group III, although all groups were comparable in terms of blood loss parameters. Group III had the highest blood loss ratio, exceeding 1000 mL. For the combination of oxytocin and intrauterine misoprostol, the ARR was 3.8% (95% CI 20.02-12.33), with a RR of 1.18 (95% CI 0.58-2.39) and a NNT of 26 (95% CI 8.1-4.9); for carbetocin, the ARR was 5.8% (95% CI 22.15-10.61), with a RR of 1.27 (95% CI 0.63-2.53) and a NNT of 17 (95% CI 9.41-4.51).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results demonstrate that carbetocin shows no superiority in the prevention of PPH in women undergoing cesarean section. Oxytocin still seems to be a highly effective alternative to prevent PPH.</p>","PeriodicalId":12727,"journal":{"name":"Ginekologia polska","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ginekologia polska","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/gpl.93374","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of three regimes of uterotonic agents on PPH in women undergoing cesarean section in our RCT.

Material and methods: This study was a randomized controlled study (NCT05083910) performed at the Bezmialem Vakif University between July 2021 and January 2022. All women were randomly allocated into three groups: Group I (n = 52) - oxytocin only; Group II (n = 52) - the combination of oxytocin plus intrauterine misoprostol; Group III (n = 52) - carbetocin only. The primary outcome measures were: PPH to evaluate with the change between the concentrations of preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin, hematocrit and intraoperative blood loss.

Results: The blood loss characteristics, including the change in hemoglobin and the change in hematocrit concentration, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative additional hemostatic uterine sutures and the need for additional uterotonics, were lowest in group III, although all groups were comparable in terms of blood loss parameters. Group III had the highest blood loss ratio, exceeding 1000 mL. For the combination of oxytocin and intrauterine misoprostol, the ARR was 3.8% (95% CI 20.02-12.33), with a RR of 1.18 (95% CI 0.58-2.39) and a NNT of 26 (95% CI 8.1-4.9); for carbetocin, the ARR was 5.8% (95% CI 22.15-10.61), with a RR of 1.27 (95% CI 0.63-2.53) and a NNT of 17 (95% CI 9.41-4.51).

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that carbetocin shows no superiority in the prevention of PPH in women undergoing cesarean section. Oxytocin still seems to be a highly effective alternative to prevent PPH.

使用三种子宫收缩剂预防剖腹产产后失血的疗效:一项前瞻性随机临床试验。
目的在我们的随机对照研究中,比较三种子宫收缩剂对剖宫产产妇 PPH 的疗效:本研究是一项随机对照研究(NCT05083910),于 2021 年 7 月至 2022 年 1 月在 Bezmialem Vakif 大学进行。所有女性被随机分配到三组:第一组(n = 52)--仅使用催产素;第二组(n = 52)--催产素加宫内米索前列醇;第三组(n = 52)--仅使用卡贝缩宫素。主要结果指标为根据术前和术后血红蛋白、血细胞比容和术中失血量的变化评估 PPH:结果:尽管各组失血参数相当,但失血特征,包括血红蛋白和血细胞比容浓度的变化、术中失血量、术中额外止血子宫缝合和额外子宫收缩剂的需要量,在III组最低。第三组的失血率最高,超过了 1000 毫升。对于催产素和宫内米索前列醇的组合,ARR 为 3.8%(95% CI 20.02-12.33),RR 为 1.18(95% CI 0.58-2.39),NNT 为 26(95% CI 8.1-4.9); 卡贝缩宫素的ARR为5.8% (95% CI 22.15-10.61),RR为1.27 (95% CI 0.63-2.53),NNT为17 (95% CI 9.41-4.51):我们的研究结果表明,卡贝缩宫素在预防剖宫产产妇发生PPH方面没有优势。催产素似乎仍是预防PPH的高效替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ginekologia polska
Ginekologia polska OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
317
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Ginekologia Polska’ is a monthly medical journal published in Polish and English language. ‘Ginekologia Polska’ will accept submissions relating to any aspect of gynaecology, obstetrics and areas directly related. ‘Ginekologia Polska’ publishes original contributions, comparative works, case studies, letters to the editor and many other categories of articles.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信