Gallos Ioannis D, Yunas Idnan, Devall Adam J, Podesek Marcelina, Tobias Aurelio, Price Malcolm J, Oladapo Olufemi T, Coomarasamy Arri
UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Department of Metabolism and Systems Science, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025 Apr 16;4(4):CD011689. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub4.
RATIONALE: Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide. Prophylactic uterotonic agents can prevent PPH. The current World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation for preventing PPH is 10 IU (international units) of intramuscular or intravenous oxytocin. Several uterotonics prevent PPH, but there remains uncertainty about the most effective agent with the fewest side effects. This is an update of a review first published in April 2018, and incorporates trustworthiness screening of eligible trials. OBJECTIVES: To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) to prevent PPH with the fewest side effects, and generate a ranking according to their effectiveness and side effect profile. SEARCH METHODS: On 5 February 2024, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL in collaboration with the Cochrane Information Specialist. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster-RCTs that compared the effectiveness and side effects of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents, placebo or no treatment for preventing PPH were eligible for inclusion. We screened eligible trials for trustworthiness. We included randomised trials published only as abstracts if we could retrieve sufficient information; we excluded quasi-randomised trials. OUTCOMES: Primary outcomes were PPH ≥ 500 mL and PPH ≥ 1000 mL. Secondary outcomes included use of additional uterotonics, blood transfusion, vomiting, hypertension, and fever. RISK OF BIAS: We used RoB 1 to assess risk of bias. SYNTHESIS METHODS: At least three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, trustworthiness, risk of bias, and certainty of evidence using GRADE. We estimated the relative effects and rankings for the primary and secondary outcomes. We reported primary outcomes for prespecified subgroups, stratified by mode of birth (caesarean versus vaginal), setting (hospital versus community), prior risk of PPH (high versus low), dose of misoprostol (≥ 600 μg versus < 600 μg), and regimen of oxytocin (bolus versus bolus plus infusion versus infusion only). We performed pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analysis to determine the relative effects and rankings of all available agents. INCLUDED STUDIES: The network meta-analysis included 122 trials (121,931 women), involving seven uterotonic agents and placebo or no treatment, conducted across 48 high-, middle- and low-income countries. Most were in a hospital setting (115/122, 94%), with women having a vaginal birth (87/122, 71%). SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: Relative effects from the network meta-analysis suggested that all agents, except injectable prostaglandins, for which data were limited, were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 500 mL compared with placebo or no treatment. The two highest-ranked agents were ergometrine plus oxytocin and misoprostol plus oxytocin. Compared with oxytocin, ergometrine plus oxytocin reduces PPH ≥ 500 mL (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 0.90, high-certainty evidence), and misoprostol plus oxytocin probably reduces PPH ≥ 500 mL (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.87; moderate-certainty evidence). Carbetocin (high-), injectable prostaglandins (moderate-) and ergometrine (low-certainty evidence) have similar effects compared with oxytocin. The evidence for misoprostol is very low certainty. All agents, except ergometrine and injectable prostaglandins, for which data were limited, were effective for preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL compared with placebo or no treatment. Ergometrine plus oxytocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin were the highest-ranked agents. Compared with oxytocin, carbetocin and injectable prostaglandins (both moderate-certainty evidence), and misoprostol plus oxytocin (low-certainty evidence) make little or no difference to PPH ≥ 1000 mL. Misoprostol may be less effective in preventing PPH ≥ 1000 mL compared with oxytocin (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.46; low-certainty evidence). The certainty of evidence for ergometrine and ergometrine plus oxytocin was very low. Compared with oxytocin, misoprostol plus oxytocin probably reduces the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.72, moderate-certainty evidence), and carbetocin (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.94; low-certainty evidence), and ergometrine plus oxytocin may reduce the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.83; low-certainty evidence). Misoprostol (low-certainty evidence) makes little or no difference to this outcome. Misoprostol plus oxytocin probably reduces the risk of needing a blood transfusion (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.58; moderate-certainty-evidence), and ergometrine plus oxytocin may reduce the risk of blood transfusion compared with oxytocin (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96, low-certainty evidence). Carbetocin (moderate-certainty evidence) and misoprostol (low-certainty evidence) probably make little or no difference to this outcome compared with oxytocin. All uterotonic agents, except for carbetocin, were associated with increased risks of side effects compared with oxytocin. Misoprostol may increase the likelihood of nausea, vomiting and fever, and probably increases the risk of diarrhoea. Injectable prostaglandins may increase the likelihood of diarrhoea. Ergometrine probably increases the likelihood of nausea and vomiting, and may increase the likelihood of hypertension, headache, and diarrhoea. Ergometrine plus oxytocin may increase the likelihood of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhoea. Misoprostol plus oxytocin probably increases the likelihood of nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea, and may increase the likelihood of fever. Analyses of the prespecified subgroups did not reveal important subgroup differences. Evidence for outcomes not presented above but reported in the summary of findings tables was very low certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Most agents are effective for preventing PPH when compared with placebo or no treatment. Ergometrine plus oxytocin, and misoprostol plus oxytocin may be more effective than the current standard oxytocin. All agents, except for carbetocin, are associated with an increased risk of some side effects compared with oxytocin. FUNDING: Supported by UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), a cosponsored programme executed by the WHO (Award No. HQHRP2220228-22.1-74309). REGISTRATION: Cochrane Library; Registration number: CD011689 and protocol [and previous versions] available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689 [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub3 and DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub2].
理由:产后出血(PPH)是全球孕产妇死亡的主要原因。预防性宫缩剂可预防产后出血。世界卫生组织(WHO)目前推荐预防产后出血的方法是肌肉注射或静脉注射10国际单位(IU)缩宫素。几种宫缩剂可预防产后出血,但对于哪种是副作用最少的最有效药物仍存在不确定性。这是对2018年4月首次发表的一篇综述的更新,并纳入了对符合条件试验的可信度筛选。 目的:确定预防产后出血且副作用最少的最有效宫缩剂,并根据其有效性和副作用情况进行排名。 检索方法:2024年2月5日,我们与Cochrane信息专家合作,检索了Cochrane系统评价数据库、医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(Embase)和护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL)。 纳入标准:所有比较宫缩剂与其他宫缩剂、安慰剂或不进行治疗预防产后出血的有效性和副作用的随机对照试验(RCT)或整群随机对照试验均符合纳入条件。我们筛选符合条件的试验以评估其可信度。如果能够检索到足够的信息,我们纳入仅以摘要形式发表的随机试验;我们排除半随机试验。 结局指标:主要结局指标为产后出血≥500 mL和产后出血≥1000 mL。次要结局指标包括使用额外的宫缩剂、输血、呕吐、高血压和发热。 偏倚风险:我们使用RoB 1评估偏倚风险。 合成方法:至少三位综述作者独立评估试验的纳入情况、可信度、偏倚风险和证据确定性(使用GRADE方法)。我们估计了主要和次要结局指标的相对效应和排名。我们报告了预先指定亚组按分娩方式(剖宫产与阴道分娩)、分娩地点(医院与社区)、产后出血既往风险(高与低)、米索前列醇剂量(≥600 μg与<600 μg)以及缩宫素给药方案(推注与推注加输注与仅输注)分层的主要结局指标。我们进行了成对荟萃分析和网状荟萃分析,以确定所有可用药物的相对效应和排名。 纳入研究:网状荟萃分析纳入了122项试验(121,931名女性),涉及七种宫缩剂以及安慰剂或不进行治疗,这些试验在48个高、中、低收入国家进行。大多数试验在医院环境中进行(115/122,94%),女性为阴道分娩(87/122,71%)。 结果合成:网状荟萃分析的相对效应表明,除数据有限的注射用前列腺素外,与安慰剂或不进行治疗相比,所有药物对于预防产后出血≥500 mL均有效。排名最高的两种药物是麦角新碱加缩宫素和米索前列醇加缩宫素。与缩宫素相比,麦角新碱加缩宫素可降低产后出血≥500 mL的发生率(风险比(RR)0.76,95%置信区间(CI)0.64至0.90,高确定性证据),米索前列醇加缩宫素可能降低产后出血≥500 mL的发生率(RR 0.70,95% CI 0.57至0.87;中等确定性证据)。与缩宫素相比,卡贝缩宫素(高确定性)、注射用前列腺素(中等确定性)和麦角新碱(低确定性证据)具有相似的效果。米索前列醇的证据确定性非常低。与安慰剂或不进行治疗相比,除数据有限的麦角新碱和注射用前列腺素外,所有药物对于预防产后出血≥1000 mL均有效。麦角新碱加缩宫素和米索前列醇加缩宫素是排名最高的药物。与缩宫素相比,卡贝缩宫素和注射用前列腺素(均为中等确定性证据)以及米索前列醇加缩宫素(低确定性证据)对产后出血≥1000 mL的影响很小或没有差异。与缩宫素相比,米索前列醇在预防产后出血≥1000 mL方面可能效果较差(RR 1.24,95% CI 1.06至1.46;低确定性证据)。麦角新碱和麦角新碱加缩宫素的证据确定性非常低。与缩宫素相比,米索前列醇加缩宫素可能减少额外宫缩剂的使用(RR 0.55,95% CI 0.42至0.72,中等确定性证据),卡贝缩宫素(RR 0.74,95% CI 0.59至0.94;低确定性证据),麦角新碱加缩宫素可能减少额外宫缩剂的使用(RR 0.68,95% CI 0.56至0.83;低确定性证据)。米索前列醇(低确定性证据)对该结局影响很小或没有差异。米索前列醇加缩宫素可能降低输血风险(RR 0.40,95% CI 0.28至0.58;中等确定性证据),与缩宫素相比,麦角新碱加缩宫素可能降低输血风险(RR 0.73,95% CI 0.56至0.96,低确定性证据)。与缩宫素相比,卡贝缩宫素(中等确定性证据)和米索前列醇(低确定性证据)对该结局可能影响很小或没有差异。与缩宫素相比,除卡贝缩宫素外,所有宫缩剂都与副作用风险增加有关。米索前列醇可能增加恶心、呕吐和发热的可能性,并且可能增加腹泻风险。注射用前列腺素可能增加腹泻的可能性。麦角新碱可能增加恶心和呕吐的可能性,并且可能增加高血压、头痛和腹泻的可能性。麦角新碱加缩宫素可能增加恶心、呕吐和腹泻的可能性。米索前列醇加缩宫素可能增加恶心、呕吐和腹泻的可能性,并且可能增加发热的可能性。对预先指定亚组的分析未发现重要的亚组差异。未在上述内容中呈现但在结果总结表中报告的结局指标的证据确定性非常低。 作者结论:与安慰剂或不进行治疗相比,大多数药物在预防产后出血方面是有效的。麦角新碱加缩宫素和米索前列醇加缩宫素可能比当前标准的缩宫素更有效。与缩宫素相比,除卡贝缩宫素外,所有药物都与某些副作用风险增加有关。 资助:由联合国开发计划署/联合国人口基金/联合国儿童基金会/世界卫生组织/世界银行人类生殖特别研究、发展和研究培训计划(HRP)资助,这是一个由世界卫生组织共同赞助的计划(奖项编号:HQHRP2220228 - 22.1 - 74309)。 注册信息:Cochrane图书馆;注册号:CD011689,协议[及以前版本]可通过DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD011689获取[DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub3和DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD011689.pub2]。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-4-16
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-4-25
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-11-24
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024-10-28
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-12-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024-11-13
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013-10-30
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-6-4
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-10-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024-12-13
Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2023-12-13
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-1-17
Am J Perinatol. 2023-2