Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz A M, Gaudier F L, Delke I
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Florida Health Sciences Center, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Aug;181(2):484-90. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70582-x.
Our purpose was to analyze published randomized trials assessing the efficacy of maintenance tocolytic therapy after short-term tocolysis in patients with acute preterm labor.
We supplemented a search of entries in electronic databases with references cited in original studies and review articles to identify randomized trials assessing the efficacy of maintenance tocolytic therapy after resolution of the acute preterm labor episode. Two masked investigators performed independent trial quality evaluation and data abstraction of each trial. We calculated an estimate of the odds ratio and risk difference for dichotomous outcomes, using both a random- and fixed-effects model. Continuous outcomes were pooled with a variance-weighted average of the within-study difference in means.
Of 17 studies identified, 12 met our criteria for meta-analysis. These 12 trials included 1590 patients, including 855 who received maintenance tocolysis and 735 comparison patients who received placebo or no maintenance treatment. Compared with placebo or no treatment, the pooled odds ratio for preventing preterm delivery was 0.95 (95% confidence interval, 0. 77-1.17), and the odds ratio for preventing recurrent preterm labor was 0.81 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.03). In addition, use of maintenance tocolytic therapy was not associated with decreased rates of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome, perinatal deaths, or differences in birth weight. Although no difference was noted in mean gestational age at delivery, those receiving tocolytic agents had a longer latency period.
Maintenance tocolytic therapy after successful treatment of an acute episode of preterm labor does not reduce the incidence of recurrent preterm labor or preterm delivery and does not improve perinatal outcome. Accordingly, the results of this meta-analysis do not support the use of maintenance tocolytic therapy after successful treatment of preterm labor.
我们的目的是分析已发表的随机试验,评估急性早产患者短期宫缩抑制治疗后维持宫缩抑制治疗的疗效。
我们在电子数据库条目的检索基础上,补充了原始研究和综述文章中引用的参考文献,以识别评估急性早产发作缓解后维持宫缩抑制治疗疗效的随机试验。两名盲法研究者对每个试验进行独立的试验质量评估和数据提取。我们使用随机效应模型和固定效应模型,计算二分结局的比值比和风险差估计值。连续结局采用研究内均值差异的方差加权平均值进行汇总。
在识别出的17项研究中,12项符合我们的荟萃分析标准。这12项试验包括1590例患者,其中855例接受维持宫缩抑制治疗,735例对照患者接受安慰剂或不接受维持治疗。与安慰剂或不治疗相比,预防早产的汇总比值比为0.95(95%置信区间,0.77 - 1.17),预防复发性早产的比值比为0.81(95%置信区间,0.64 - 1.03)。此外,维持宫缩抑制治疗的使用与新生儿呼吸窘迫综合征发生率降低、围产期死亡或出生体重差异无关。尽管分娩时的平均孕周没有差异,但接受宫缩抑制剂的患者潜伏期更长。
急性早产发作成功治疗后进行维持宫缩抑制治疗并不能降低复发性早产或早产的发生率,也不能改善围产期结局。因此,这项荟萃分析的结果不支持在早产成功治疗后使用维持宫缩抑制治疗。