Suppr超能文献

用于预防需要阴道宫颈环扎术的女性流产的环扎缝线类型:C-STICH RCT。

Cerclage suture type to prevent pregnancy loss in women requiring a vaginal cervical cerclage: the C-STICH RCT.

机构信息

Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust, UK.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2024 Aug;28(40):1-44. doi: 10.3310/YKTW8402.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Second trimester miscarriage and preterm birth is a significant global problem. Surgical cervical cerclage is performed to prevent pregnancy loss and preterm birth. It utilises either a monofilament or braided suture. It is hypothesised that a braided material becomes colonised with pathogenic bacteria that causes vaginal dysbiosis, infection and cerclage failure.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of the study was to examine the effectiveness of using a monofilament suture material as opposed to a braided suture material on pregnancy loss in women requiring a vaginal cervical cerclage.

DESIGN

Superiority open randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Seventy-five maternity sites across the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Women experiencing a singleton pregnancy requiring a cervical cerclage.

INTERVENTIONS

Monofilament suture or braided suture.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was pregnancy loss (miscarriage and perinatal mortality, including any stillbirth or neonatal death in the first week of life). Secondary outcomes included the core outcome set for preterm birth.

METHODS

Women were randomised on a 1 : 1 basis to monofilament or braided cerclage utilising a bespoke randomisation service with minimisation dependent on the site, indication for cerclage, intention to use progesterone and planned surgical technique. The inclusion criteria were three or more previous mid-trimester losses or preterm births, insertion of a cerclage in a previous pregnancy, a history of a mid-trimester loss or preterm birth with a shortened cervical length in the current pregnancy or in women who clinicians deemed at risk of preterm birth. The exclusion criteria were an emergency or rescue cerclage, age of < 18 years, being unable to give informed consent or the cerclage having to be placed abdominally. The original sample size was calculated based on a relative risk reduction of 41% from a pregnancy loss rate of 19% in the braided group to 11% in the monofilament group with 90% power and alpha at = 0.05. The independent data monitoring committee noted a lower-than-anticipated pooled event rate within the trial and recommended an increase in sample size to 2050. The outcome data were collected using clinical record forms from the maternal and neonatal medical records and reported to Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit.

RESULTS

A total of 2049 women were randomised, after withdrawals and loss to follow-up, data on 1005 women in the monofilament group and 993 women in the braided group were included. The baseline demographics between the groups were similar. There was no evidence of a difference in pregnancy loss rates between the monofilament and braided groups (80/1003 vs. 75/993; adjusted risk ratio: 1.05, 95% confidence interval: 0.79 to 1.40; adjusted risk difference: 0.002, 95% confidence interval: -0.02 to 0.03).

LIMITATIONS

The trial did not collect long-term paediatric outcomes. There were no safety concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence of a difference in pregnancy loss between a monofilament suture and a braided suture.

FUTURE WORK

Long-term follow-up of neonates born within the C-STICH (cerclage suture type for an insufficient cervix and its effects on health outcomes) trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered as ISRCTN15373349.

FUNDING

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/04/107) and is published in full in ; Vol. 28, No. 40. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

摘要

背景

中期流产和早产是一个重大的全球性问题。宫颈环扎术用于预防妊娠丢失和早产。它使用单丝缝线或编织缝线。据推测,编织材料会被导致阴道菌群失调、感染和环扎失败的致病细菌定植。

目的

本研究的主要目的是检查在需要阴道宫颈环扎的妇女中,使用单丝缝线材料与编织缝线材料相比,对妊娠丢失的效果。

设计

优效性开放随机对照试验。

设置

英国 75 个产科地点。

参与者

经历单胎妊娠并需要宫颈环扎的妇女。

干预措施

单丝缝线或编织缝线。

主要观察指标

主要结局是妊娠丢失(流产和围产儿死亡率,包括第一周内的任何死产或新生儿死亡)。次要结局包括早产的核心结局集。

方法

根据特定的随机分配服务,将女性以 1:1 的比例随机分配至单丝或编织环扎术,最小化取决于地点、环扎指征、使用孕酮的意向和计划的手术技术。纳入标准为三次或更多次中期流产或早产、前一次妊娠中插入环扎术、当前妊娠或以前妊娠中出现中期流产或早产且宫颈长度缩短、或临床医生认为有早产风险的妇女。排除标准为紧急或抢救环扎术、年龄<18 岁、无法给予知情同意或环扎术必须在腹部进行。原始样本量是基于从编织组的妊娠丢失率 19%降至单丝组的 11%的相对风险降低率计算的,具有 90%的功效和 95%置信区间为 0.05 的 alpha。独立数据监测委员会注意到试验内的汇总事件率低于预期,并建议增加样本量至 2050。结局数据使用来自产妇和新生儿病历的临床记录表格收集,并报告给伯明翰临床试验单位。

结果

共随机分配了 2049 名女性,在撤回和随访丢失后,1005 名女性在单丝组和 993 名女性在编织组的数据被纳入。两组之间的基线人口统计学特征相似。单丝组和编织组的妊娠丢失率之间没有证据表明存在差异(80/1003 与 75/993;调整后的风险比:1.05,95%置信区间:0.79 至 1.40;调整后的风险差异:0.002,95%置信区间:-0.02 至 0.03)。

局限性

该试验未收集长期儿科结局。没有安全问题。

结论

单丝缝线和编织缝线之间的妊娠丢失没有证据表明存在差异。

未来工作

对 C-STICH(宫颈不足的环扎缝线类型及其对健康结局的影响)试验中出生的新生儿进行长期随访。

试验注册

本试验在 ISRCTN 注册,注册号为 ISRCTN86311224。

资金

该奖项由英国国家卫生与保健优化研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估计划(NIHR 奖励号:13/04/107)资助,并在全文中发表;第 28 卷,第 40 期。请访问 NIHR 资助和奖励网站以获取更多奖励信息。

相似文献

6
Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy.宫颈环扎术用于预防单胎妊娠早产。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 6;6(6):CD008991. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008991.pub3.
8
Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy.宫颈环扎术用于预防单胎妊娠早产。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Apr 18(4):CD008991. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008991.pub2.

本文引用的文献

6
Cervical stitch (cerclage) for preventing preterm birth in singleton pregnancy.宫颈环扎术用于预防单胎妊娠早产。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 6;6(6):CD008991. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008991.pub3.
10
Preterm labor: one syndrome, many causes.早产:一种综合征,多种病因。
Science. 2014 Aug 15;345(6198):760-5. doi: 10.1126/science.1251816. Epub 2014 Aug 14.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验