Singata-Madliki Mandisa, Nieto-Calvache Albaro J, Rivera Torres Luisa F, Abdul Hazmath, Batting Joanne, Cebekhulu Sylvia N, Chauke Lawrence, Soma-Pillay Priya, Fawcus Susan, Govender Logie, Majeke Busiwe, Mbongozi Xolani, Middleton Katrin, Naidoo Poovangela, Ndaba Sanele, Spence Trevi, Balie Gaynor M, Monroy Angelica, Cantor Monica, Hofmeyr G Justus
Effective Care Research Unit, University of the Witwatersrand and Walter Sisulu University, East London, South Africa.
Unidad De Alta Complejidad Obstetrica, Fundación Valle Del Lili, Cali, Colombia.
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2025 Jul;170(1):326-337. doi: 10.1002/ijgo.16164. Epub 2025 Jan 24.
To compare low-cost "Suction Tube Uterine Tamponade" (STUT) treatment for refractory postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) with uterine balloon tamponade (UBT) using a randomized feasibility study.
After verbal assent, we allocated participants with refractory PPH by randomly ordered envelopes to STUT or routine UBT at 10 hospitals in South Africa and one tertiary referral center in Colombia between January 10, 2020, and May 3, 2024. In the STUT group, we inserted a 24 FG Levin stomach tube into the uterine cavity and applied suction. The control group received standard UBT, mainly the Elavi free-flow balloon or the Bakri fixed volume balloon. There were fundamental differences between the South African and the Colombian sites, so the pre-specified analysis combined data from the two countries by meta-analysis.
We enrolled 59 participants. The rate of the primary outcome (blood loss >1000 mL or laparotomy or death) was 8/27 (30%) in the STUT group versus 14/27 (52%) in the UBT group (risk ratio [RR] 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30-1.05, P = 0.07). Per protocol analysis was 7/26 (27%) versus 15/28 (54%) (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.96, P = 0.04). Reporting severe pain during the procedures was less frequent in the STUT group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25-0.86, P = 0.01). Most secondary outcomes favored the STUT group, with low certainty.
STUT was experienced as less painful than UBT. Results were consistent with reported observational findings and one other randomized trial evidence of greater effectiveness for suction than balloon tamponade.
采用随机可行性研究,比较低成本的“吸引管宫腔压迫法”(STUT)与宫腔球囊压迫法(UBT)治疗难治性产后出血(PPH)的效果。
在获得口头同意后,于2020年1月10日至2024年5月3日期间,我们通过随机排序的信封,将难治性PPH患者分配至南非的10家医院及哥伦比亚的一家三级转诊中心接受STUT或常规UBT治疗。在STUT组,我们将一根24FG的莱文胃管插入宫腔并施加吸引。对照组接受标准UBT,主要是伊拉维自由流球囊或巴克利定量球囊。南非和哥伦比亚的研究地点存在根本差异,因此预先指定的分析通过荟萃分析合并了两国的数据。
我们纳入了59名参与者。STUT组的主要结局(失血>1000 mL或剖腹手术或死亡)发生率为8/27(30%),而UBT组为14/27(52%)(风险比[RR]0.56,95%置信区间[CI]0.30 - 1.05,P = 0.07)。符合方案分析为7/26(27%)对15/28(54%)(RR 0.49,95%CI 0.25 - 0.96,P = 0.04)。STUT组术中报告严重疼痛的频率较低(RR 0.46,95%CI 0.25 - 0.86,P = 0.01)。大多数次要结局倾向于STUT组,但确定性较低。
与UBT相比,STUT的疼痛体验较轻。结果与已报道的观察性研究结果以及另一项关于吸引比球囊压迫更有效的随机试验证据一致。