34
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Misoprostol for treating postpartum haemorrhage: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN72263357]

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Postpartum haemorrhage remains an important cause of maternal death despite treatment with conventional therapy. Uncontrolled studies and one randomised comparison with conventional oxytocics have reported dramatic effects with high-dose misoprostol, usually given rectally, for treatment of postpartum haemorrhage, but this has not been evaluated in a placebo-controlled trial.

          Methods

          The study was conducted at East London Hospital Complex, Tembisa and Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospitals, South Africa. Routine active management of the third stage of labour was practised. Women with more than usual postpartum bleeding thought to be related to inadequate uterine contraction were invited to participate, and to sign informed consent. All routine treatment was given from a special 'Postpartum Haemorrhage Trolley'. In addition, participants who consented were enrolled by drawing the next in a series of randomised treatment packs containing either misoprostol 5 × 200 μg or similar placebo, which were given 1 orally, 2 sublingually and 2 rectally.

          Results

          With misoprostol there was a trend to reduced blood loss ≥500 ml in 1 hour after enrolment measured in a flat plastic 'fracture bedpan', the primary outcome (6/117 vs 11/120, relative risk 0.56; 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 1.46). There was no difference in mean blood loss or haemoglobin level on day 1 after birth < 6 g/dl or blood transfusion. Side-effects were increased, namely shivering (63/116 vs 30/118; 2.14, 1.50 to 3.04) and pyrexia > 38.5°C (11/114 vs 2/118; 5.69, 1.29 to 25). In the misoprostol group 3 women underwent hysterectomy of whom 1 died, and there were 2 further maternal deaths.

          Conclusions

          Because of a lower than expected incidence of the primary outcome in the placebo group, the study was underpowered. We could not confirm the dramatic effect of misoprostol reported in several unblinded studies, but the results do not exclude a clinically important effect. Larger studies are needed to assess substantive outcomes and risks before misoprostol enters routine use.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Pharmacokinetics of different routes of administration of misoprostol.

          The pharmacokinetic parameters of four different routes of administration of a single dose of 400 microg of misoprostol were studied. A total of 40 women undergoing termination of pregnancy by suction evacuation was randomized by computer model to receive 400 microg of misoprostol by one of four routes: (i) sublingual (ii) oral (iii) vaginal and (iv) vaginal with addition of water. Venous blood samples were taken at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 120, 240 and 360 min after the administration of misoprostol. Misoprostol acid (MPA) was determined in serum samples using gas chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Sublingual misoprostol achieved the highest serum peak concentration (Cmax) (574.8 +/- 250.7 pg/ml) of MPA and this was significantly higher than those in the other groups [Oral: 287.6 +/- 144.3 pg/ml (P < 0.01), vaginal: 125.2 +/- 53.8 pg/ml (P < 0.001) and vaginal with water: 162.8 +/- 57.1 pg/ml (P < 0.001)]. The time to peak concentration (Tmax) was similar in both the sublingual (26.0 +/- 11.5 min) and oral groups (27.5 +/- 14.8 min) and was significantly shorter than those in both vaginal groups. The area under the MPA concentration versus time curve up to 360 min in the sublingual group (743.7 +/- 291.2 pg.h/ml) was significantly greater than those in oral (402.8 +/- 151.6 pg.h/ml, P < 0.05) and vaginal (433.7 +/- 182.6 pg.h/ml, P < 0.05) groups, but no significant difference was found between sublingual and vaginal administration if water (649.3 +/- 333.8 pg.h/ml) was added. The new sublingual route of administration of misoprostol demonstrated a great potential to be developed into a method of medical abortion.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            WHO multicentre randomised trial of misoprostol in the management of the third stage of labour.

            Postpartum haemorrhage is a leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. Active management of the third stage of labour, including use of a uterotonic agent, has been shown to reduce blood loss. Misoprostol (a prostaglandin E1 analogue) has been suggested for this purpose because it has strong uterotonic effects, can be given orally, is inexpensive, and does not need refrigeration for storage. We did a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial to determine whether oral misoprostol is as effective as oxytocin during the third stage of labour. In hospitals in Argentina, China, Egypt, Ireland, Nigeria, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, and Vietnam, we randomly assigned women about to deliver vaginally to receive 600 microg misoprostol orally or 10 IU oxytocin intravenously or intramuscularly, according to routine practice, plus corresponding identical placebos. The medications were administered immediately after delivery as part of the active management of the third stage of labour. The primary outcomes were measured postpartum blood loss of 1000 mL or more, and the use of additional uterotonics without an unacceptable level of side-effects. We chose an upper limit of a 35% increase in the risk of blood loss of 1000 mL or more as the margin of clinical equivalence, which was assessed by the confidence interval of the relative risk. Analysis was by intention to treat. 9264 women were assigned misoprostol and 9266 oxytocin. 37 women in the misoprostol group and 34 in the oxytocin group had emergency caesarean sections and were excluded. 366 (4%) of women on misoprostol had a measured blood loss of 1000 mL or more, compared with 263 (3%) of those on oxytocin (relative risk 1.39 [95% CI 1.19-1.63], p<0.0001). 1398 (15%) women in the misoprostol group and 1002 (11%) in the oxytocin group required additional uterotonics (1.40 [1.29-1.51], p<0.0001). Misoprostol use was also associated with a significantly higher incidence of shivering (3.48 [3.15-3.84]) and raised body temperature (7.17 [5.67-9.07]) in the first hour after delivery. 10 IU oxytocin (intravenous or intramuscular) is preferable to 600 microg oral misoprostol in the active management of the third stage of labour in hospital settings where active management is the norm.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Misoprostol for induction of labour: a systematic review.

              To determine, from the best available evidence, the effectiveness and safety of misoprostol administered vaginally or orally for third trimester cervical ripening or induction of labour. Clinical trials of misoprostol used for cervical ripening or labour induction in the third trimester were identified from the register of randomised trials maintained by the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. All identified trials were considered for inclusion in the review according to a prespecified protocol. Primary outcomes were chosen to address clinical effectiveness (delivery within 24 hours) and safety (uterine hyperstimulation, caesarean section, serious maternal and neonatal morbidity) and were determined a priori. All meta-analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle. In the absence of heterogeneity the summary statistics have been expressed as typical relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Vaginal misoprostol: one small study showed that the use of misoprostol results in more effective cervical ripening and reduced need for oxytocin when compared with placebo. When compared with oxytocin, vaginal misoprostol was more effective for labour induction. The relative risk of failure to achieve vaginal delivery within 24 hours was 0.48 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.66). However, the relative risks for uterine hyperstimulation with and without fetal heart rate abnormalities were 2.54 (95% CI 1.12 to 5.77) and 2.96 (95% CI 2.11 to 4.14), respectively. In three out of four trials which studied women with intact membranes and unfavourable cervices, failure to achieve vaginal delivery within 24 hours was reduced with misoprostol when compared with other prostaglandins (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81). Vaginal misoprostol was associated with increased uterine hyperstimulation both without fetal heart rate changes (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.14) and with associated fetal heart rate changes (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.04). There was also an increase in meconium stained amniotic fluid following vaginal misoprostol (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.79). Oral misoprostol: one small trial suggests that, when compared with placebo, oral misoprostol reduces the need for oxytocin and shortens the time between induction and delivery. Compared with other prostaglandins one small trial showed a reduced need for oxytocin with oral misoprostol. Two trials compared oral with vaginal misoprostol using different doses. No significant differences were evident. Overall, misoprostol appears to be more effective than conventional methods of cervical ripening and labour induction. Although no differences in perinatal outcome were shown, the studies were not sufficiently large to exclude the possibility of uncommon serious adverse effects. In particular the increase in uterine hyperstimulation with fetal heart rate changes following misoprostol is a matter for concern. It is possible that, if sufficient numbers are studied, an unacceptably high number of serious adverse events including uterine rupture and asphyxial fetal deaths may occur. The data at present are not robust enough to address the issue of safety. Thus, though misoprostol shows promise as a highly effective, inexpensive and convenient agent for labour induction, it cannot be recommended for routine use at this stage. Lower dose misoprostol regimens should be investigated further.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
                BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2393
                2004
                6 August 2004
                : 4
                : 16
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Effective Care Research Unit, University of Witwatersrand and Fort Hare, and East London Hospital Complex, East London, South Africa
                [2 ]Department of Nursing, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
                [3 ]Tembisa Hospital Effective Care Research Unit, Tembisa, South Africa
                [4 ]Aga Khan Health Services, Aiglemont, France
                [5 ]HRP/RHR, World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland
                Article
                1471-2393-4-16
                10.1186/1471-2393-4-16
                514549
                15298718
                d2caff15-1521-4aa7-ae3a-b3ba3fb05ca2
                Copyright © 2004 Justus Hofmeyr et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 February 2004
                : 6 August 2004
                Categories
                Research Article

                Obstetrics & Gynecology
                Obstetrics & Gynecology

                Comments

                Comment on this article