Blood pressure changes when uterine stimulants are used after normal delivery

Prophylactic oxytocin for the third stage of labour to prevent postpartum haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Active management of the third stage of labour reduces the risk of postpartum blood loss (postpartum haemorrhage (PPH)), and is defined as administration of a prophylactic uterotonic, early umbilical cord clamping and controlled cord traction to facilitate placental delivery. The choice of uterotonic varies across the globe and may have an impact on maternal outcomes. This is an update of a review first published in 2001 and last updated in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of prophylactic oxytocin to prevent PPH and other adverse maternal outcomes in the third stage of labour.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (6 March 2019) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, quasi- or cluster-randomised trials including women undergoing vaginal delivery who received prophylactic oxytocin during management of the third stage of labour. Primary outcomes were blood loss 500 mL or more after delivery, need for additional uterotonics, and maternal all-cause mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed trial quality. Data were checked for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes 24 trials, with 23 trials involving 10,018 women contributing data. Due to many trials assessed at high risk of bias, evidence grade ranged from very low to moderate quality.Prophylactic oxytocin versus no uterotonics or placebo (nine trials)Prophylactic oxytocin compared with no uterotonics or placebo may reduce the risk of blood loss of 500 mL after delivery (average risk ratio (RR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (C) 0.37 to 0.72; 4162 women; 6 studies; Tau² = 0.10, I² = 75%; low-quality evidence), and blood loss 1000 mL after delivery (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.83; 4123 women; 5 studies; low-quality evidence). Prophylactic oxytocin probably reduces the need for additional uterotonics (average RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.80; 3135 women; 4 studies; Tau² = 0.07, I² = 44%; moderate-quality evidence). There may be no difference in the risk of needing a blood transfusion in women receiving oxytocin compared to no uterotonics or placebo (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.78; 3081 women; 3 studies; low-quality evidence). Oxytocin may be associated with an increased risk of a third stage greater than 30 minutes (RR 2.55, 95% CI 0.88 to 7.44; 1947 women; 1 study; moderate-quality evidence), however the confidence interval is wide and includes 1.0, indicating that there may be little or no difference.Prophylactic oxytocin versus ergot alkaloids (15 trials)It is uncertain whether oxytocin reduces the likelihood of blood loss 500 mL (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.25; 3082 women; 10 studies; Tau² = 0.14, I² = 49%; very low-quality evidence) or the need for additional uterotonics compared to ergot alkaloids (average RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.81; 2178 women; 8 studies; Tau² = 0.76, I² = 79%; very low-quality evidence), because the quality of this evidence is very low. The quality of evidence was very low for blood loss of 1000 mL (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.01; 1577 women; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence), and need for blood transfusion (average RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.34 to 5.51; 1578 women; 7 studies; Tau² = 1.34, I² = 45%; very low-quality evidence), making benefit of oxytocin over ergot alkaloids uncertain. Oxytocin probably increases the risk of a prolonged third stage greater than 30 minutes (RR 4.69, 95% CI 1.63 to 13.45; 450 women; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence), although it is uncertain if this translates into increased risk of manual placental removal (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.10; 3127 women; 8 studies; Tau² = 1.07, I² = 76%; very low-quality evidence). Oxytocin may make little or no difference to risk of diastolic blood pressure > 100 mm Hg (average RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.05; 960 women; 3 studies; Tau² = 1.23, I² = 50%; low-quality evidence), and is probably associated with a lower risk of vomiting (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.14; 1991 women; 7 studies; moderate-quality evidence), although the impact of oxytocin on headaches is uncertain (average RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.02; 1543 women; 5 studies; Tau² = 2.54, I² = 72%; very low-quality evidence).Prophylactic oxytocin-ergometrine versus ergot alkaloids (four trials)Oxytocin-ergometrine may slightly reduce the risk of blood loss greater than 500 mL after delivery compared to ergot alkaloids (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.94; 1168 women; 3 studies; low-quality evidence), based on outcomes from quasi-randomised trials with a high risk of bias. There were no maternal deaths reported in either treatment group in the one trial that reported this outcome (RR not estimable; 1 trial, 807 women; moderate-quality evidence). Need for additional uterotonics was not reported.No subgroup differences were observed between active or expectant management, or different routes or doses of oxytocin for any of our comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic oxytocin compared with no uterotonics may reduce blood loss and the need for additional uterotonics. The effect of oxytocin compared to ergot alkaloids is uncertain with regards to blood loss, need for additional uterotonics, and blood transfusion. Oxytocin may increase the risk of a prolonged third stage compared to ergot alkaloids, although whether this translates into increased risk of manual placental removal is uncertain. This potential risk must be weighed against the possible increased risk of side effects associated with ergot alkaloids. Oxytocin-ergometrine may reduce blood loss compared to ergot alkaloids, however the certainty of this conclusion is low. More high-quality trials are needed to assess optimal dosing and route of oxytocin administration, with inclusion of important outcomes such as maternal mortality, shock, and transfer to a higher level of care. A network meta-analysis of uterotonics for PPH prevention plans to address issues around optimal dosing and routes of oxytocin and other uterotonics.

Uterotonic agents for preventing postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. The current World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for preventing PPH is 10 IU (international units) of intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin. There are several uterotonic agents for preventing PPH but there is still uncertainty about which agent is most effective with the least side effects. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in April 2018 and was updated to incorporate results from a recent large WHO trial.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) to prevent PPH with the least side effects, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (24 May 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and side effects of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents, placebo or no treatment for preventing PPH were eligible for inclusion. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included blood loss and related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, maternal well-being and satisfaction and side effects. Primary outcomes were also reported for pre-specified subgroups, stratifying by mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of administration. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available agents.

MAIN RESULTS

The network meta-analysis included 196 trials (135,559 women) involving seven uterotonic agents and placebo or no treatment, conducted across 53 countries (including high-, middle- and low-income countries). Most trials were performed in a hospital setting (187/196, 95.4%) with women undergoing a vaginal birth (71.5%, 140/196).Relative effects from the network meta-analysis suggested that all agents were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. The three highest ranked uterotonic agents for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination and carbetocin. There is evidence that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.84, moderate certainty), carbetocin (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.93, moderate certainty) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.86, low certainty) may reduce PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol, injectable prostaglandins, and ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin.All agents except ergometrine and injectable prostaglandins were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with placebo or no treatment. High-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine plus oxytocin (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03) and misoprostol plus oxytocin (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.11) make little or no difference in the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that ergometrine may make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin meanwhile the evidence on carbetocin was of very low certainty. High-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol is less effective in preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL when compared with oxytocin (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.42). Despite the comparable relative treatment effects between all uterotonics (except misoprostol) and oxytocin, ergometrine plus oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combinations and carbetocin were the highest ranked agents for PPH ≥ 1000 mL.Misoprostol plus oxytocin reduces the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73, high certainty) and probably also reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.70, moderate certainty) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin, injectable prostaglandins and ergometrine plus oxytocin may also reduce the use of additional uterotonics but the certainty of the evidence is low. No meaningful differences could be detected between all agents for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were rare in the included randomised trials where they were reported.The two combination regimens were associated with important side effects. When compared with oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin combination increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.11, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.18, high certainty) and fever (RR 3.14, 95% CI 2.20 to 4.49, moderate certainty). Ergometrine plus oxytocin increases the likelihood of vomiting (RR 2.93, 95% CI 2.08 to 4.13, moderate certainty) and may make little or no difference to the risk of hypertension, however absolute effects varied considerably and the certainty of the evidence was low for this outcome.Subgroup analyses did not reveal important subgroup differences by mode of birth (caesarean versus vaginal birth), setting (hospital versus community), risk of PPH (high versus low risk for PPH), dose of misoprostol (≥ 600 mcg versus < 600 mcg) and regimen of oxytocin (bolus versus bolus plus infusion versus infusion only).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All agents were generally effective for preventing PPH when compared with placebo or no treatment. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination may have some additional desirable effects compared with the current standard oxytocin. The two combination regimens, however, are associated with significant side effects. Carbetocin may be more effective than oxytocin for some outcomes without an increase in side effects.

Prophylactic use of ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour

BACKGROUND

Previous research has shown that the prophylactic use of uterotonic agents in the third stage of labour reduces postpartum blood loss and moderate to severe postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). PPH is defined as a blood loss of 500 mL or more within 24 hours after birth. This is one of a series of systematic reviews assessing the effects of prophylactic use of uterotonic drugs; in this review prophylactic ergot alkaloids as a whole, and different regimens of administration of ergot alkaloids, are compared with no uterotonic agents. This is an update of a Cochrane Review which was first published in 2007 and last updated in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic use of ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour by any route (intravenous (IV), intramuscular (IM), or oral) compared with no uterotonic agents, for the prevention of PPH.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (19 September 2017); we also searched reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing prophylactic ergot alkaloids by any route (IV, IM, or oral) with no uterotonic agents in the third stage of labour among women giving birth vaginally.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and checked them for accuracy; they also assessed the risk of bias in included studies. Two review authors assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

There were eight included studies: three studies had a low risk of bias and five studies had high risk of bias. The studies compared ergot alkaloids with no uterotonic agents, with a total of 2031 women in the ergot alkaloids group and 1978 women in the placebo or no treatment group. Seven studies used the IV/IM route of administration and one study used the oral route.Ergot alkaloids (any route of administration) versus no uterotonic agentsUse of ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour decreased mean blood loss (mean difference (MD) -80.52 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI) -96.39 to -64.65 mL; women = 2718; studies = 3; moderate-quality evidence); decreased PPH of at least 500 mL (average risk ratio (RR) 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.94; women = 3708; studies = 5; I² = 83%; low-quality evidence); increased maternal haemoglobin concentration (g/dL) at 24 to 48 hours postpartum (MD 0.50 g/dL, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.62; women = 1429; studies = 1; moderate-quality evidence); and decreased the use of therapeutic uterotonics (average RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.90; women = 2698; studies = 3; I² = 89%; low-quality evidence). There were no clear differences between groups in severe PPH of at least 1000 mL (average RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.59; women = 1718; studies = 2; I² = 74%; very low-quality evidence). The risk of retained placenta or manual removal of the placenta, or both, were inconsistent with high heterogeneity. Ergot alkaloids increased the risk of elevated blood pressure (average RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.03 to 6.57: women = 2559; studies = 3; low-quality evidence) and pain after birth requiring analgesia (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.78: women = 1429; studies = 1; moderate-quality evidence) but there were no differences between groups in vomiting, nausea, headache or eclamptic fit.Results for IV/IM ergot alkaloids versus no uterotonic agents were similar to those for the main comparison of ergot alkaloids administered by any route, since most of the studies (seven of eight) used the IV/IM route. Only one small study (289 women) compared oral ergometrine with placebo and it showed no benefit of ergometrine over placebo. No maternal adverse effects were reported.None of the studies reported on any of our prespecified neonatal outcomes AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic IM or IV injections of ergot alkaloids may be effective in reducing blood loss, reducing PPH (estimated blood loss of at least 500 mL), and increasing maternal haemoglobin. Ergot alkaloids may also decrease the use of therapeutic uterotonics, but adverse effects may include elevated blood pressure and pain after birth requiring analgesia. There were no differences between groups in terms of other adverse effects (vomiting, nausea, headache or eclamptic fit). There is a lack of evidence on the effects of ergot alkaloids on severe PPH, and retained or manual removal of placenta. There is also a lack of evidence on the oral route of administration of ergot alkaloids.

Uterotonic agents for preventing postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic drugs can prevent PPH, and are routinely recommended. There are several uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH but it is still debatable which drug is best.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most effective uterotonic drug(s) to prevent PPH, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side-effect profile.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (1 June 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) for unpublished trial reports (30 June 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled comparisons or cluster trials of effectiveness or side-effects of uterotonic drugs for preventing PPH.Quasi-randomised trials and cross-over trials are not eligible for inclusion in this review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL as primary outcomes. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available drugs. We stratified our primary outcomes according to mode of birth, prior risk of PPH, healthcare setting, dosage, regimen and route of drug administration, to detect subgroup effects.The absolute risks in the oxytocin are based on meta-analyses of proportions from the studies included in this review and the risks in the intervention groups were based on the assumed risk in the oxytocin group and the relative effects of the interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

This network meta-analysis included 140 randomised trials with data from 88,947 women. There are two large ongoing studies. The trials were mostly carried out in hospital settings and recruited women who were predominantly more than 37 weeks of gestation having a vaginal birth. The majority of trials were assessed to have uncertain risk of bias due to poor reporting of study design. This primarily impacted on our confidence in comparisons involving carbetocin trials more than other uterotonics.The three most effective drugs for prevention of PPH ≥ 500 mL were ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination. These three options were more effective at preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with oxytocin, the drug currently recommended by the WHO (ergometrine plus oxytocin risk ratio (RR) 0.69 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.83), moderate-quality evidence; carbetocin RR 0.72 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.00), very low-quality evidence; misoprostol plus oxytocin RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.90), moderate-quality evidence). Based on these results, about 10.5% women given oxytocin would experience a PPH of ≥ 500 mL compared with 7.2% given ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, 7.6% given carbetocin, and 7.7% given misoprostol plus oxytocin. Oxytocin was ranked fourth with close to 0% cumulative probability of being ranked in the top three for PPH ≥ 500 mL.The outcomes and rankings for the outcome of PPH ≥ 1000 mL were similar to those of PPH ≥ 500 mL. with the evidence for ergometrine plus oxytocin combination being more effective than oxytocin (RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.95), high-quality evidence) being more certain than that for carbetocin (RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.38 to 1.28), low-quality evidence), or misoprostol plus oxytocin combination (RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.14), moderate-quality evidence)There were no meaningful differences between all drugs for maternal deaths or severe morbidity as these outcomes were so rare in the included randomised trials.Two combination regimens had the poorest rankings for side-effects. Specifically, the ergometrine plus oxytocin combination had the higher risk for vomiting (RR 3.10 (95% CI 2.11 to 4.56), high-quality evidence; 1.9% versus 0.6%) and hypertension [RR 1.77 (95% CI 0.55 to 5.66), low-quality evidence; 1.2% versus 0.7%), while the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination had the higher risk for fever (RR 3.18 (95% CI 2.22 to 4.55), moderate-quality evidence; 11.4% versus 3.6%) when compared with oxytocin. Carbetocin had similar risk for side-effects compared with oxytocin although the quality evidence was very low for vomiting and for fever, and was low for hypertension.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination, carbetocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin combination were more effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL than the current standard oxytocin. Ergometrine plus oxytocin combination was more effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL than oxytocin. Misoprostol plus oxytocin combination evidence is less consistent and may relate to different routes and doses of misoprostol used in the studies. Carbetocin had the most favourable side-effect profile amongst the top three options; however, most carbetocin trials were small and at high risk of bias.Amongst the 11 ongoing studies listed in this review there are two key studies that will inform a future update of this review. The first is a WHO-led multi-centre study comparing the effectiveness of a room temperature stable carbetocin versus oxytocin (administered intramuscularly) for preventing PPH in women having a vaginal birth. The trial includes around 30,000 women from 10 countries. The other is a UK-based trial recruiting more than 6000 women to a three-arm trial comparing carbetocin, oxytocin and ergometrine plus oxytocin combination. Both trials are expected to report in 2018.Consultation with our consumer group demonstrated the need for more research into PPH outcomes identified as priorities for women and their families, such as women's views regarding the drugs used, clinical signs of excessive blood loss, neonatal unit admissions and breastfeeding at discharge. To date, trials have rarely investigated these outcomes. Consumers also considered the side-effects of uterotonic drugs to be important but these were often not reported. A forthcoming set of core outcomes relating to PPH will identify outcomes to prioritise in trial reporting and will inform futures updates of this review. We urge all trialists to consider measuring these outcomes for each drug in all future randomised trials. Lastly, future evidence synthesis research could compare the effects of different dosages and routes of administration for the most effective drugs.

Prophylactic oxytocin for the third stage of labour to prevent postpartum haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Active management of the third stage of labour has been shown to reduce the risk of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) greater than 1000 mL. One aspect of the active management protocol is the administration of prophylactic uterotonics, however, the type of uterotonic, dose, and route of administration vary across the globe and may have an impact on maternal outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of prophylactic oxytocin at any dose to prevent PPH and other adverse maternal outcomes related to the third stage of labour.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials including pregnant women anticipating a vaginal delivery where prophylactic oxytocin was given during management of the third stage of labour. The primary outcomes were blood loss > 500 mL and the use of therapeutic uterotonics.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

This updated review included 20 trials (involving 10,806 women). Prophylactic oxytocin versus placebo Prophylactic oxytocin compared with placebo reduced the risk of PPH greater than 500 mL, (risk ratio (RR) 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.74; six trials, 4203 women; T² = 0.11, I² = 78%) and the need for therapeutic uterotonics (RR 0.56; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.87, four trials, 3174 women; T² = 0.10, I² = 58%). The benefit of prophylactic oxytocin to prevent PPH greater than 500 mL was seen in all subgroups. Decreased use of therapeutic uterotonics was only seen in the following subgroups: randomised trials with low risk of bias (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.92; three trials, 3122 women; T² = 0.11, I² = 69%); trials that performed active management of the third stage (RR 0.39; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.58; one trial, 1901 women; heterogeneity not applicable); trials that delivered oxytocin as an IV bolus (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.39 to 0.82; one trial, 1000 women; heterogeneity not applicable); and in trials that gave oxytocin at a dose of 10 IU (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.68; two trials, 2901 women; T² = 0.02, I² = 27%). Prophylactic oxytocin versus ergot alkaloids. Prophylactic oxytocin was superior to ergot alkaloids in preventing PPH greater than 500 mL (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.61 to 0.94; five trials, 2226 women; T² = 0.00, I² = 0%). The benefit of oxytocin over ergot alkaloids to prevent PPH greater than 500 mL only persisted in the subgroups of quasi-randomised trials (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.96; three trials, 1402 women; T² = 0.00, I² = 0%) and in trials that performed active management of the third stage of labour (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.89; two trials, 943 women; T² = 0.00, I² = 0%). Use of prophylactic oxytocin was associated with fewer side effects compared with use of ergot alkaloids; including decreased nausea between delivery of the baby and discharge from the labour ward (RR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.53; three trials, 1091 women; T² = 0.41, I² = 41%) and vomiting between delivery of the baby and discharge from the labour ward (RR 0.07; 95% CI 0.02 to 0.25; three trials, 1091 women; T² = 0.45, I² = 30%). Prophylactic oxytocin + ergometrine versus ergot alkaloids: There was no benefit seen in the combination of oxytocin and ergometrine versus ergometrine alone in preventing PPH greater than 500 mL (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.34 to 2.41; five trials, 2891 women; T² = 0.89, I² = 80%). The use of oxytocin and ergometrine was associated with increased mean blood loss (MD 61.0 mL; 95% CI 6.00 to 116.00 mL; fixed-effect analysis; one trial, 34 women; heterogeneity not applicable).In all three comparisons, there was no difference in mean length of the third stage or need for manual removal of the placenta between treatment arms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic oxytocin at any dose decreases both PPH greater than 500 mL and the need for therapeutic uterotonics compared to placebo alone. Taking into account the subgroup analyses from both primary outcomes, to achieve maximal benefit providers may opt to implement a practice of giving prophylactic oxytocin as part of the active management of the third stage of labour at a dose of 10 IU given as an IV bolus. If IV delivery is not possible, IM delivery may be used as this route of delivery did show a benefit to prevent PPH greater than 500 mL and there was a trend to decrease the need for therapeutic uterotonics, albeit not statistically significant.Prophylactic oxytocin was superior to ergot alkaloids in preventing PPH greater than 500 mL; however, in subgroup analysis this benefit did not persist when only randomised trials with low risk of methodologic bias were analysed. Based on this, there is limited high-quality evidence supporting a benefit of prophylactic oxytocin over ergot alkaloids. However, the use of prophylactic oxytocin was associated with fewer side effects, specifically nausea and vomiting, making oxytocin the more desirable option for routine use to prevent PPH.There is no evidence of benefit when adding oxytocin to ergometrine compared to ergot alkaloids alone, and there may even be increased harm as one study showed evidence that using the combination was associated with increased mean blood loss compared to ergot alkaloids alone.Importantly, there is no evidence to suggest that prophylactic oxytocin increases the risk of retained placenta when compared to placebo or ergot alkaloids.More placebo-controlled, randomised, and double-blinded trials are needed to improve the quality of data used to evaluate the effective dose, timing, and route of administration of prophylactic oxytocin to prevent PPH. In addition, more trials are needed especially, but not only, in low- and middle-income countries to evaluate these interventions in the birth centres that shoulder the majority of the burden of PPH in order to improve maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide.

Prophylactic use of ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour

BACKGROUND

Previous research has shown that the prophylactic use of uterotonic agents in the third stage of labour reduces postpartum blood loss and moderate to severe postpartum haemorrhage. This is one of a series of systematic reviews assessing the effects of prophylactic use of uterotonic drugs - here, prophylactic ergot alkaloids compared with no uterotonic agents, and different regimens of administration of ergot alkaloids.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic use of ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour compared with no uterotonic agents, as well as with different routes or timing of administration for prevention of postpartum haemorrhage.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 December 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 4) and MEDLINE (1966 to December 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic ergot alkaloids with no uterotonic agents or comparing different routes or timings of administration of ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour among women giving birth vaginally.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We systematically reviewed the potential studies, considered eligible studies, assessed the validity of each included study and extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six studies comparing ergot alkaloids with no uterotonic agents, with a total of 1996 women in ergot alkaloids group and 1945 women in placebo or no treatment group. The use of injected ergot alkaloids in the third stage of labour significantly decreased mean blood loss (weighted mean difference -83.03 ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) -99.39 to -66.66 ml) and postpartum haemorrhage of at least 500 ml (relative risk (RR) 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.69). The risk of retained placenta or manual removal of the placenta, or both, were inconsistent. Ergot alkaloids increased the risk of vomiting (RR 11.81, 95% CI 1.78 to 78.28), elevation of blood pressure (RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.03 to 6.57) and pain after birth requiring analgesia (RR 2.53, 95% CI 1.34 to 4.78). One study compared oral ergometrine with placebo and showed no significant benefit of ergometrine over placebo. No maternal adverse effects were reported. There were no included trials that compared different administration regimens of ergot alkaloids.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic intramuscular or intravenous injections of ergot alkaloids are effective in reducing blood loss and postpartum haemorrhage, but adverse effects include vomiting, elevation of blood pressure and pain after birth requiring analgesia, particularly with the intravenous route of administration.

Prophylactic use of oxytocin in the third stage of labour

BACKGROUND

Many maternal deaths across the world result from complications of the third stage of labour (when the placenta is delivered).

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of oxytocin given prophylactically in the third stage of labour on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Relevant trials were identified in the Cochrane Collaboration Controlled Trials Register and the Pregnancy and Childbirth Review Group's Specialised Register of Controlled Trials. Date of last search: May 2001.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All acceptably randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials including pregnant women anticipating a vaginal delivery where oxytocin was given prophylactically for the third stage of labour.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for relevance and methodological quality, and extracted data. Analysis was by intention to treat. Subgroup analyses were based on extent of selection bias, oxytocin in the context of active or expectant management of the third stage, and timing of administration. Results are presented as relative risks, and weighted mean difference, both with 95% confidence intervals using a fixed effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

In seven trials involving over 3000 women in hospital and/or developed country settings, prophylactic oxytocin showed benefits (reduced blood loss (relative risk (RR) for blood loss > 500 ml 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43, 0.59) and need for therapeutic oxytocics (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.39, 0.64).) compared to no uterotonics, although there was a non-significant trend towards more manual removal of the placenta (RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.79, 1.73) which was most marked in the expectant management subgroup, and blood transfusions (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.50, 3.39) in the trials with more manual removals of the placenta). In six trials involving over 2800 women, there was little evidence of differential effects for oxytocin versus ergot alkaloids, except ergot alkaloids are associated with more manual removals of the placenta (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.41, 0.79), and with the suggestion of more raised blood pressure (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.19, 1.58) than with oxytocin. In five trials involving over 2800 women, there was little evidence of a synergistic effects of adding oxytocin to ergometrine versus ergometrine alone. For all other outcomes in the comparisons either there are no data or the number of adverse events is very small, and so definite conclusions cannot be drawn.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There are strong suggestions of benefit for oxytocin in terms of postpartum haemorrhage, and the need for therapeutic oxytocics, but without sufficient information about other outcomes and side-effects it is difficult to be confident about the trade-offs for these benefits, especially if the risk of manual removal of the placenta may be increased. There seems little evidence in favour of ergot alkaloids alone compared to either oxytocin alone, or to Syntometrine, but the data are sparse. More trials are needed in domiciliary deliveries in developing countries, which shoulder most of the burden of third stage complications.

Combining summaries of binary outcomes with those of continuous outcomes in a meta-analysis

We present a methodology for combining trials some of which report continuous outcome measures and others binary outcomes created by a dichotomy of the continuous measurement. This was motivated by a series of controlled clinical trials investigating the effect of prophylactic use of oxytocics on postpartum blood loss during labor. Data were available in the form of summary statistics from published papers. The log-odds ratio is used as a common measure of treatment difference across all trials. We discuss the general applicability of this approach.

Pharmacological Management of Labor

Normal spontaneous labor at term without maternal or fetal complications does not always occur. In these situations, pharmacological intervention is often the safest and most suitable method of delivery. The pharmacological management of labor includes the use of multiple agents that alter cervical dilatation and uterine contractions, resulting in delivery of the fetus and treatment of postpartum emergencies. This article provides a description of normal and abnormal labor patterns and possible peripartum complications. The use of oxytocin, ergot derivatives, and prostaglandins for augmentation of dysfunctional labor, induction of labor, and management of peripartum emergencies is discussed to provide information on availability of product, indications for use, clinical efficacy, potential adverse effects, and contraindications to use.

A comparison of 'active' and 'physiological' management of the third stage of labour

A randomised, controlled trial of 1429 women was carried out to compare 'active' management of the third stage of labour, using i.v. Ergometrine 0.5 mg, with a method of 'physiological' management, in women at 'low risk' to haemorrhage. In the "active" management group a higher incidence of the following complications was found:- manual removal of placenta (p less than 0.0005), problems such as nausea (p less than 0.0005), vomiting (p less than 0.0005), and severe after-birth pains (p less than 0.02), hypertension (p less than 0.0001) and secondary postpartum haemorrhage (p less than 0.02). The incidence of postpartum haemorrhage (blood loss greater than 500 ml) and postnatal haemoglobins less than 10 gm/100 were higher in the 'physiological' group (p less than 0.0005, p less than 0.002). No difference was found in the need for blood transfusion in either group. The routine use of i.v. Ergometrine 0.5 mg during the third stage of labour in women at 'low risk' to haemorrhage does not appear to be necessary and has many adverse effects. Further studies comparing different methods of 'physiological' management are recommended in order to reduce to a minimum the incidence of postpartum haemorrhage and anaemia.

Choice of oxytocic preparation for routine use in the management of the third stage of labour: an overview of the evidence from controlled trials

Prophylactic use of oxytocics reduces the risk of postpartum haemorrhage by about 40%. The analysis presented in this paper assesses which oxytocic preparation is associated with the least risk of postpartum haemorrhage and examines the relative effects of different preparations on the length of the third stage, the risk of manual removal of the placenta, blood pressure and other side-effects. A mixture of oxytocin and ergometrine (Syntometrine) appears to be the safest and most effective prophylactic of the alternatives which have been compared, but the quality of the evidence is not satisfactory. There is scope for a randomized comparison of Syntometrine with oxytocin to obtain unbiased and more precise estimates of their relative effects on postpartum haemorrhage, blood pressure and unpleasant side-effects.

The effects of routine oxytocic administration in the management of the third stage of labour: an overview of the evidence from controlled trials

Recent claims that routine active management of the third stage of labour increases rather than decreases maternal and neonatal morbidity have prompted us to conduct a systematic review of the relevant controlled trials. In this paper we have analysed data derived from a total of nine published reports of controlled trials in which an oxytocic drug was compared with either a placebo or no routine prophylactic. Oxytocic drugs used routinely appear to reduce the risk of postpartum haemorrhage by about 40% (typical odds ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.73) implying that for every 22 women given such an oxytocic, one postpartum haemorrhage could be prevented. The available data are insufficient to assess the possible effects of this policy on the incidence of retained placenta, hypertension and other possible adverse effects.