直肠米索前列醇与静脉催产素减少剖宫产术出血量的有效性和安全性:一项符合prisma标准的随机临床试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

IF 1 Q4 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Ebraheem Albazee, Ahmed Soliman, Khaled Albakri, Mohamed Elbanna, Nada Alaa Moussa, Hazem Metwally Faragalla
{"title":"直肠米索前列醇与静脉催产素减少剖宫产术出血量的有效性和安全性:一项符合prisma标准的随机临床试验的系统评价和荟萃分析","authors":"Ebraheem Albazee,&nbsp;Ahmed Soliman,&nbsp;Khaled Albakri,&nbsp;Mohamed Elbanna,&nbsp;Nada Alaa Moussa,&nbsp;Hazem Metwally Faragalla","doi":"10.4274/tjod.galenos.2023.15098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Blood loss is an inevitable complication and a major contributor to maternal morbidity and mortality at cesarean deliveries. We detected a potential preference regarding the efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol over oxytocin as a uterotonic agent. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and other databases for the relevant trials from inception to September 2022. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin to control bleeding in women undergoing cesarean delivery. Our primary outcomes were the intra- and postoperative blood loss, and hemoglobin drop after delivery. Secondary outcomes included the need for blood transfusion, need for additional uterotonics, difference in operative time, as well as safety outcomes such as the incidence of shivering, pyrexia, nausea, and vomiting. Our search strategy revealed 1007 unique records, of them we retrieved full texts of 19 articles to check their adherence to our eligibility criteria. Seven RCTs with 1,090 participants were included. We found a significant reduction in postoperative blood loss [MD: -27.9; 95% confidence interval (CI): (-53.85, -2.10); p=0.03], and Hb drop after delivery [MD: -11; 95% CI: (-0.19, -0.03); p=0.01]. There is no significant difference regarding intraoperative blood loss, operative time, need for blood transfusion, or need for additional uterotonics. We could not find a significant difference between the two groups regarding safety outcomes, except for a higher shivering incidence in the misoprostol group [RR: 0.33; 95% CI; (0.16, 0.70); p=0.004]. We found a significant reduction in postoperative blood loss with a potentially favorable safety profile in women who administrated rectal misoprostol compared with oxytocin administration. Our findings recommend and prefer rectal misoprostol as a cheaper and effective uterotonic agent over oxytocin, which is expensive and requires an adequate cold chain for transportation and storage.</p>","PeriodicalId":45340,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","volume":"20 2","pages":"142-153"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/cd/9c/TJOG-20-142.PMC10236227.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin on reducing blood loss in cesarean section: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.\",\"authors\":\"Ebraheem Albazee,&nbsp;Ahmed Soliman,&nbsp;Khaled Albakri,&nbsp;Mohamed Elbanna,&nbsp;Nada Alaa Moussa,&nbsp;Hazem Metwally Faragalla\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tjod.galenos.2023.15098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Blood loss is an inevitable complication and a major contributor to maternal morbidity and mortality at cesarean deliveries. We detected a potential preference regarding the efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol over oxytocin as a uterotonic agent. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and other databases for the relevant trials from inception to September 2022. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin to control bleeding in women undergoing cesarean delivery. Our primary outcomes were the intra- and postoperative blood loss, and hemoglobin drop after delivery. Secondary outcomes included the need for blood transfusion, need for additional uterotonics, difference in operative time, as well as safety outcomes such as the incidence of shivering, pyrexia, nausea, and vomiting. Our search strategy revealed 1007 unique records, of them we retrieved full texts of 19 articles to check their adherence to our eligibility criteria. Seven RCTs with 1,090 participants were included. We found a significant reduction in postoperative blood loss [MD: -27.9; 95% confidence interval (CI): (-53.85, -2.10); p=0.03], and Hb drop after delivery [MD: -11; 95% CI: (-0.19, -0.03); p=0.01]. There is no significant difference regarding intraoperative blood loss, operative time, need for blood transfusion, or need for additional uterotonics. We could not find a significant difference between the two groups regarding safety outcomes, except for a higher shivering incidence in the misoprostol group [RR: 0.33; 95% CI; (0.16, 0.70); p=0.004]. We found a significant reduction in postoperative blood loss with a potentially favorable safety profile in women who administrated rectal misoprostol compared with oxytocin administration. Our findings recommend and prefer rectal misoprostol as a cheaper and effective uterotonic agent over oxytocin, which is expensive and requires an adequate cold chain for transportation and storage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology\",\"volume\":\"20 2\",\"pages\":\"142-153\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/cd/9c/TJOG-20-142.PMC10236227.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.galenos.2023.15098\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjod.galenos.2023.15098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

失血是一种不可避免的并发症,也是剖宫产产妇发病和死亡的主要原因。我们发现直肠米索前列醇的有效性和安全性优于催产素作为子宫扩张剂。我们检索了PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science、Cochrane和其他数据库,检索了从开始到2022年9月的相关试验。我们纳入了随机临床试验(rct),比较了直肠米索前列醇与静脉催产素在控制剖宫产妇女出血方面的作用。我们的主要结果是分娩后的出血和血红蛋白下降。次要结局包括是否需要输血、是否需要额外的子宫紧张术、手术时间的差异以及颤抖、发热、恶心和呕吐等安全性结局。我们的搜索策略显示了1007条独特的记录,其中我们检索了19篇文章的全文,以检查它们是否符合我们的资格标准。共纳入7项随机对照试验,共1090名受试者。我们发现术后出血量显著减少[MD: -27.9;95%置信区间(CI): (-53.85, -2.10);p=0.03],分娩后Hb下降[MD: -11;95% ci: (-0.19, -0.03);p = 0.01)。两组在术中出血量、手术时间、需要输血或需要额外子宫强张方面无显著差异。我们没有发现两组在安全性结果上有显著差异,除了米索前列醇组有更高的颤抖发生率[RR: 0.33;95%可信区间;(0.16, 0.70);p = 0.004)。我们发现直肠给药米索前列醇与催产素给药相比,术后出血量显著减少,且具有潜在的良好安全性。我们的研究结果推荐并偏爱直肠米索前列醇作为一种更便宜和有效的子宫扩张剂,而不是催产素,后者昂贵且需要足够的冷链运输和储存。
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 rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin on reducing blood loss in cesarean section: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin on reducing blood loss in cesarean section: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin on reducing blood loss in cesarean section: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin on reducing blood loss in cesarean section: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Blood loss is an inevitable complication and a major contributor to maternal morbidity and mortality at cesarean deliveries. We detected a potential preference regarding the efficacy and safety of rectal misoprostol over oxytocin as a uterotonic agent. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and other databases for the relevant trials from inception to September 2022. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared rectal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin to control bleeding in women undergoing cesarean delivery. Our primary outcomes were the intra- and postoperative blood loss, and hemoglobin drop after delivery. Secondary outcomes included the need for blood transfusion, need for additional uterotonics, difference in operative time, as well as safety outcomes such as the incidence of shivering, pyrexia, nausea, and vomiting. Our search strategy revealed 1007 unique records, of them we retrieved full texts of 19 articles to check their adherence to our eligibility criteria. Seven RCTs with 1,090 participants were included. We found a significant reduction in postoperative blood loss [MD: -27.9; 95% confidence interval (CI): (-53.85, -2.10); p=0.03], and Hb drop after delivery [MD: -11; 95% CI: (-0.19, -0.03); p=0.01]. There is no significant difference regarding intraoperative blood loss, operative time, need for blood transfusion, or need for additional uterotonics. We could not find a significant difference between the two groups regarding safety outcomes, except for a higher shivering incidence in the misoprostol group [RR: 0.33; 95% CI; (0.16, 0.70); p=0.004]. We found a significant reduction in postoperative blood loss with a potentially favorable safety profile in women who administrated rectal misoprostol compared with oxytocin administration. Our findings recommend and prefer rectal misoprostol as a cheaper and effective uterotonic agent over oxytocin, which is expensive and requires an adequate cold chain for transportation and storage.

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
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
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