PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14583982

Progestogen for preventing miscarriage.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Progesterone, a female sex hormone, is known to induce secretory changes in the lining of the uterus essential for successful implantation of a fertilized egg. It has been suggested that a causative factor in many cases of miscarriage may be inadequate secretion of progestogens. Therefore, progestational agents have been used, beginning in the first trimester of pregnancy, in an attempt to prevent spontaneous miscarriage. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of progestogens as a preventative therapy against miscarriage. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (April 2003), CENTRAL, MEDLINE (1966 to April 2003), EMBASE (1980 to April 2003), CINAHL (1982 to April 2003), NHMRC Clinical Trials Register (April 2003) and Meta-Register (April 2003). We searched references from relevant articles, attempting to contact authors where necessary, and contacted experts in the field for unpublished works. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing progestogens with placebo or no treatment given in an effort to prevent miscarriage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Thirty trials were identified in the initial search. At least, two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data. Data for all outcomes were in dichotomous form and the Peto odds ratio was used in the meta-analysis for all comparisons. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials (1988 women) met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis of all women, regardless of gravidity and number of previous miscarriages, showed no statistically significant difference in the risk of miscarriage between progestogen and placebo or no treatment groups (odds ratio (OR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.34) and no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse effect in either mother or baby. In a subgroup analysis of three trials involving women who had recurrent miscarriages (three or more consecutive miscarriages), progestogen treatment showed a statistically significant decrease in miscarriage rate compared to placebo or no treatment (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.91). No statistically significant differences were found between the route of administration of progestogen (oral, intramuscular, vaginal) versus placebo or no treatment. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence to support the routine use of progestogen to prevent miscarriage in early to mid pregnancy. However, further trials in women with a history of recurrent miscarriage may be warranted, given the trend for improved live birth rates in these women and the finding of no statistically significant difference between treatment and control groups in rates of adverse effects suffered by either mother or baby in the available evidence.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R M Oates-Whitehead, D M Haas, J A K Carrier. 2003. Progestogen for preventing miscarriage.. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd003511

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

The immunological profile of infertile women after repeated IVF failure (preliminary study).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this preliminary study was to estimate the immunological profile of patients after repeated IVF failures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventeen women after repeated IVF failure and 10 non-pregnant women with a history of successful IVF pregnancies were included in the study. We estimated the presence of the auto-antibodies, such as: antinuclear antibodies (ANA), antithyroid antibodies (ATA), antiphospolipid antibodies (APA), antismooth muscle antibodies (ASMA), and antisperm antibodies (ASA). Furthermore, we estimated the percentage of B-1 CD 19+5+ lymphocytes and NK cells using flow cytometry. RESULTS: In the group of patients after IVF failure the percentage of B-1 CD 19+5+ lymphocytes was higher than 1.5% and significantly higher when compared to controls. Three patients after IVF failure had elevated percentages of peripheral blood NK cells. Fourteen infertile patients after IVF failure (82.3%) had at least one abnormal result on autoimmune testing. One patient from the study group had no positive results of immunological tests. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that immunological alterations may be involved in the etiopathogenesis of unexplained infertility. Furthermore, the results suggest that there is a need for immunological diagnostics in the group of patients with unexplained infertility A greater number of patients is needed for further investigations.

Abortion, Habitual↗

Manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) in the management of first trimester pregnancy loss.

BACKGROUND: Manual vacuum aspiration is not widely used for the evacuation of retained products of conception in western Europe despite its well-proven success and safety record. Nor is there much information about its use under intravenous (systemic) analgesia or patient-controlled anaesthesia in modern settings. AIM: To evaluate the use of manual vacuum aspiration for the evacuation of retained products of conception under systemic analgesia or patient-controlled anaesthesia in the management of first trimester miscarriages. METHODS: Fifty-eight women with a diagnosis of first trimester miscarriage (42 missed and 16 incomplete miscarriages) were treated with manual vacuum aspiration under systemic analgesia or patient-controlled anaesthesia. Success rates and patient satisfaction and acceptability were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 58 women recruited, 42 underwent the procedure under systemic analgesia and 15 under patient-controlled sedation while 1 woman opted for general anaesthesia. Successful evacuation was achieved in all cases. Both analgesic methods were associated with high levels of patient satisfaction and acceptability. CONCLUSIONS: Manual vacuum aspiration is an option in the management of all first trimester pregnancy losses. Comparisons with other treatment options are indicated.

Abortion, Habitual↗

Leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF) gene mutations in women with unexplained infertility and recurrent failure of implantation after IVF and embryo transfer.

OBJECTIVE: Leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF) plays a central role in the control of implantation. We undertook this study to investigate the prevalence of LIF gene alterations in women with unexplained infertility and with recurrent failure of implantation after in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and embryo transfer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty five women with recurrent failure of implantation after IVF (group A), 50 with unexplained infertility (group B) and 105 fertile women (controls) were screened for LIF gene mutations. Standard genomic DNA extraction, PCR amplification of the LIF gene and single-strand conformation polymorphism (SSCP) analysis were used to search for mutations which were subsequently confirmed by DNA sequencing. RESULTS: In group A, one woman was identified as having a neutral LIF gene polymorphism in exon 3 without affecting protein conformation. In group B, one woman with a heterozygous mutation and one with a neutral polymorphism were detected. In controls, only one woman with a neutral polymorphism in the intron between exons 2 and 3 was found. The woman with a potentially functional LIF gene mutation in group B achieved an ongoing clinical pregnancy after ovarian superovulation. DISCUSSION: Potentially functional mutations in the LIF gene do infrequently occur in women with unexplained infertility and may play a role in the etiology of infertility. However, routine screening for LIF mutations or polymorphisms in these women is not justified for the low prevalence of gene alterations.

Abortion, Habitual↗