不同孕激素对首次先兆流产的疗效和安全性:一项网络荟萃分析。

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Hongqiong Zhao, Wei He, Chunyu Xia, Zhu Yang
{"title":"不同孕激素对首次先兆流产的疗效和安全性:一项网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Hongqiong Zhao, Wei He, Chunyu Xia, Zhu Yang","doi":"10.1002/ijgo.15987","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Threatened miscarriage is defined as early vaginal bleeding before 12 weeks of gestational age and can occur in any pregnancy regardless of maternal age, race, comorbidities, lifestyle, or socioeconomic status, and about one-quarter of threatened miscarriages proceed to complete miscarriage. To assess the relative effectiveness and safety of different progestogens in women with first threatened miscarriage, using a network meta-analysis. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to April 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness or safety of placebo or different progestogens for the treatment of threatened miscarriage were eligible for inclusion, including dydrogesterone (oral), progesterone (oral, vaginal, rectal), and 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone (intramuscular). A Bayesian network meta-analysis with Markov chain Monte-Carlo simulation was performed in this study. A pairwise meta-analysis was carried out by synthesizing studies that compared the same interventions using a fixed-effects model. The primary outcome was the percentage of miscarriage (defined as delivery before 24 weeks of gestation) and preterm birth (defined as birth before 37 weeks of gestation), and the secondary outcomes were live birth rate, congenital abnormalities, neonatal outcomes (low birth weight <2500 g), and adverse events. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. In total, 18 RCTs with six different interventions were included. Oral dydrogesterone can reduce the risk of miscarriage compared with both placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.76) and vaginal progesterone (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.89) in women with first threatened miscarriage. In women with first threatened miscarriage, oral progesterone also reduced the risk of miscarriage compared with placebo (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.93). However, from the available evidence, there was no statistically significant difference between progestogens and placebo in preterm birth, congenital abnormality, and live birth rate. Oral dydrogesterone was safe and better at reducing miscarriage than vaginal progesterone and placebo for women with first threatened miscarriage, and better at reducing miscarriage compared with placebo for women with threatened miscarriage.</p>","PeriodicalId":14164,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of different progestogens in women with first threatened miscarriage: A network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Hongqiong Zhao, Wei He, Chunyu Xia, Zhu Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ijgo.15987\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Threatened miscarriage is defined as early vaginal bleeding before 12 weeks of gestational age and can occur in any pregnancy regardless of maternal age, race, comorbidities, lifestyle, or socioeconomic status, and about one-quarter of threatened miscarriages proceed to complete miscarriage. To assess the relative effectiveness and safety of different progestogens in women with first threatened miscarriage, using a network meta-analysis. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to April 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness or safety of placebo or different progestogens for the treatment of threatened miscarriage were eligible for inclusion, including dydrogesterone (oral), progesterone (oral, vaginal, rectal), and 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone (intramuscular). A Bayesian network meta-analysis with Markov chain Monte-Carlo simulation was performed in this study. A pairwise meta-analysis was carried out by synthesizing studies that compared the same interventions using a fixed-effects model. The primary outcome was the percentage of miscarriage (defined as delivery before 24 weeks of gestation) and preterm birth (defined as birth before 37 weeks of gestation), and the secondary outcomes were live birth rate, congenital abnormalities, neonatal outcomes (low birth weight <2500 g), and adverse events. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. In total, 18 RCTs with six different interventions were included. Oral dydrogesterone can reduce the risk of miscarriage compared with both placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.76) and vaginal progesterone (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.89) in women with first threatened miscarriage. In women with first threatened miscarriage, oral progesterone also reduced the risk of miscarriage compared with placebo (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.93). However, from the available evidence, there was no statistically significant difference between progestogens and placebo in preterm birth, congenital abnormality, and live birth rate. Oral dydrogesterone was safe and better at reducing miscarriage than vaginal progesterone and placebo for women with first threatened miscarriage, and better at reducing miscarriage compared with placebo for women with threatened miscarriage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15987\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.15987","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

先兆性流产被定义为妊娠12周之前的早期阴道出血,可发生在任何妊娠中,与母亲的年龄、种族、合并症、生活方式或社会经济地位无关,约四分之一的先兆性流产会导致完全流产。通过网络荟萃分析,评估不同孕激素在首次先兆流产妇女中的相对有效性和安全性。系统检索PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库,从成立到2023年4月。评估安慰剂或不同孕激素治疗先兆流产的有效性或安全性的随机对照试验(rct)符合纳入标准,包括地孕酮(口服)、孕酮(口服、阴道、直肠)和17-α-羟孕酮(肌内注射)。本研究采用马尔可夫链蒙特卡罗模拟贝叶斯网络元分析。使用固定效应模型对相同干预措施进行比较的综合研究进行了两两荟萃分析。主要结局是流产(定义为妊娠24周前分娩)和早产(定义为妊娠37周前出生)的百分比,次要结局是活产率、先天性异常、新生儿结局(低出生体重)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and safety of different progestogens in women with first threatened miscarriage: A network meta-analysis.

Threatened miscarriage is defined as early vaginal bleeding before 12 weeks of gestational age and can occur in any pregnancy regardless of maternal age, race, comorbidities, lifestyle, or socioeconomic status, and about one-quarter of threatened miscarriages proceed to complete miscarriage. To assess the relative effectiveness and safety of different progestogens in women with first threatened miscarriage, using a network meta-analysis. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to April 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness or safety of placebo or different progestogens for the treatment of threatened miscarriage were eligible for inclusion, including dydrogesterone (oral), progesterone (oral, vaginal, rectal), and 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone (intramuscular). A Bayesian network meta-analysis with Markov chain Monte-Carlo simulation was performed in this study. A pairwise meta-analysis was carried out by synthesizing studies that compared the same interventions using a fixed-effects model. The primary outcome was the percentage of miscarriage (defined as delivery before 24 weeks of gestation) and preterm birth (defined as birth before 37 weeks of gestation), and the secondary outcomes were live birth rate, congenital abnormalities, neonatal outcomes (low birth weight <2500 g), and adverse events. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. In total, 18 RCTs with six different interventions were included. Oral dydrogesterone can reduce the risk of miscarriage compared with both placebo (odds ratio [OR] 0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.32-0.76) and vaginal progesterone (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.89) in women with first threatened miscarriage. In women with first threatened miscarriage, oral progesterone also reduced the risk of miscarriage compared with placebo (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39-0.93). However, from the available evidence, there was no statistically significant difference between progestogens and placebo in preterm birth, congenital abnormality, and live birth rate. Oral dydrogesterone was safe and better at reducing miscarriage than vaginal progesterone and placebo for women with first threatened miscarriage, and better at reducing miscarriage compared with placebo for women with threatened miscarriage.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
493
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics publishes articles on all aspects of basic and clinical research in the fields of obstetrics and gynecology and related subjects, with emphasis on matters of worldwide interest.
×
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