We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
META-ANALYSIS
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Supplementation with progestogens in the first trimester of pregnancy to prevent miscarriage in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials.
Fertility and Sterility 2017 Februrary
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether treatment with progestogens in the first trimester of pregnancy would decrease the incidence of miscarriage in women with a history of unexplained recurrent miscarriage.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING: Not applicable.
PATIENT(S): Women with a history of unexplained recurrent miscarriage.
INTERVENTION(S): Randomized, controlled trials were identified by searching electronic databases. We included randomized, controlled trials comparing supplementation with progestogens (i.e., intervention group) in the first trimester of pregnancy with control (either placebo or no treatment) in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage. All types of progestogens, including natural P and synthetic progestins, were analyzed.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome was the incidence of miscarriage. The summary measures were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULT(S): Ten trials including 1,586 women with recurrent miscarriage were analyzed. Eight studies used placebo as control and were double-blind. Regarding the intervention, two RCTs used natural P, whereas the other eight studies used progestins: medroxyprogesterone, cyclopentylenol ether of progesterone, dydrogesterone, or 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. Pooled data from the 10 trials showed that women with a history of unexplained recurrent miscarriage who were randomized to the progestogens group in the first trimester and before 16 weeks had a lower risk of recurrent miscarriage (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.97) and higher live birth rate (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.15) compared with those who did not. No statistically significant differences were found in the other secondary outcomes, including preterm birth (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.71-1.66), neonatal mortality (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.44-7.34), and fetal genital abnormalities (RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.22-12.62).
CONCLUSION(S): Our findings provide evidence that supplementation with progestogens may reduce the incidence of recurrent miscarriages and seem to be safe for the fetuses. Synthetic progestogens, including weekly IM 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate, but not natural P, were associated with a lower risk of recurrent miscarriage. Given the limitations of the studies included in our meta-analysis, it is difficult to recommend route and dose of progestogen therapy. Further head-to-head trials of P types, dosing, and route of administration are required.
DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING: Not applicable.
PATIENT(S): Women with a history of unexplained recurrent miscarriage.
INTERVENTION(S): Randomized, controlled trials were identified by searching electronic databases. We included randomized, controlled trials comparing supplementation with progestogens (i.e., intervention group) in the first trimester of pregnancy with control (either placebo or no treatment) in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage. All types of progestogens, including natural P and synthetic progestins, were analyzed.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome was the incidence of miscarriage. The summary measures were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULT(S): Ten trials including 1,586 women with recurrent miscarriage were analyzed. Eight studies used placebo as control and were double-blind. Regarding the intervention, two RCTs used natural P, whereas the other eight studies used progestins: medroxyprogesterone, cyclopentylenol ether of progesterone, dydrogesterone, or 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. Pooled data from the 10 trials showed that women with a history of unexplained recurrent miscarriage who were randomized to the progestogens group in the first trimester and before 16 weeks had a lower risk of recurrent miscarriage (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53-0.97) and higher live birth rate (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02-1.15) compared with those who did not. No statistically significant differences were found in the other secondary outcomes, including preterm birth (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.71-1.66), neonatal mortality (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.44-7.34), and fetal genital abnormalities (RR 1.68, 95% CI 0.22-12.62).
CONCLUSION(S): Our findings provide evidence that supplementation with progestogens may reduce the incidence of recurrent miscarriages and seem to be safe for the fetuses. Synthetic progestogens, including weekly IM 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate, but not natural P, were associated with a lower risk of recurrent miscarriage. Given the limitations of the studies included in our meta-analysis, it is difficult to recommend route and dose of progestogen therapy. Further head-to-head trials of P types, dosing, and route of administration are required.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app