We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Comparative effectiveness of prophylactic strategies for preeclampsia: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE: Preeclampsia is a common disease during pregnancy that leads to fetal and maternal adverse events. Few head-to-head clinical trials are currently comparing the effectiveness of prophylactic strategies for preeclampsia. In this network meta-analysis, we aimed to compare the efficacy of prophylactic strategies for preventing preeclampsia in pregnant women at risk.
DATA SOURCES: Articles published in or before September 2021 from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, references of key articles, and previous meta-analyses were manually searched.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing prophylactic strategies preventing preeclampsia with each other or with negative controls were included.
METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and assessed evidence certainty. The efficacy of prophylactic strategies was estimated by frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analysis models. The primary composite outcome was preeclampsia/ pregnancy-induced hypertension.
RESULTS: In total, 130 trials with a total of 112,916 patients were included to assess 13 prophylactic strategies. Low-molecular-weight heparin (0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.87), vitamin D supplementation (0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.95), and exercise (0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.92) were as efficacious as calcium supplementation (0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.82) and aspirin (0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.86) in preventing preeclampsia/pregnancy-induced hypertension, with a P score ranking of 85%, 79%, 76%, 74%, and 61%, respectively. In the head-to-head comparison, no differences were found between these effective prophylactic strategies for preventing preeclampsia and pregnancy-induced hypertension, except with regard to exercise, which tended to be superior to aspirin and calcium supplementation in preventing pregnancy-induced hypertension. Furthermore, the prophylactic effects of aspirin and calcium supplementation were robust across subgroups. However, the prophylactic effects of low-molecular-weight heparin, exercise, and vitamin D supplementation on preeclampsia and pregnancy-induced hypertension varied with different risk populations, dosages, areas, etc. The certainty of the evidence was moderate to very low.
CONCLUSION: Low-molecular-weight heparin, vitamin D supplementation, exercise, calcium supplementation, and aspirin reduce the risk of preeclampsia/pregnancy-induced hypertension. No significant differences between effective prophylactic strategies were found in preventing preeclampsia. These findings raise the necessity to reevaluate the prophylactic effects of low-molecular-weight heparin, vitamin D supplementation, and exercise on preeclampsia.
DATA SOURCES: Articles published in or before September 2021 from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov, references of key articles, and previous meta-analyses were manually searched.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing prophylactic strategies preventing preeclampsia with each other or with negative controls were included.
METHODS: Two reviewers independently extracted data, assessed the risk of bias, and assessed evidence certainty. The efficacy of prophylactic strategies was estimated by frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analysis models. The primary composite outcome was preeclampsia/ pregnancy-induced hypertension.
RESULTS: In total, 130 trials with a total of 112,916 patients were included to assess 13 prophylactic strategies. Low-molecular-weight heparin (0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.87), vitamin D supplementation (0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.95), and exercise (0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.92) were as efficacious as calcium supplementation (0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.82) and aspirin (0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.86) in preventing preeclampsia/pregnancy-induced hypertension, with a P score ranking of 85%, 79%, 76%, 74%, and 61%, respectively. In the head-to-head comparison, no differences were found between these effective prophylactic strategies for preventing preeclampsia and pregnancy-induced hypertension, except with regard to exercise, which tended to be superior to aspirin and calcium supplementation in preventing pregnancy-induced hypertension. Furthermore, the prophylactic effects of aspirin and calcium supplementation were robust across subgroups. However, the prophylactic effects of low-molecular-weight heparin, exercise, and vitamin D supplementation on preeclampsia and pregnancy-induced hypertension varied with different risk populations, dosages, areas, etc. The certainty of the evidence was moderate to very low.
CONCLUSION: Low-molecular-weight heparin, vitamin D supplementation, exercise, calcium supplementation, and aspirin reduce the risk of preeclampsia/pregnancy-induced hypertension. No significant differences between effective prophylactic strategies were found in preventing preeclampsia. These findings raise the necessity to reevaluate the prophylactic effects of low-molecular-weight heparin, vitamin D supplementation, and exercise on preeclampsia.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
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