PDF herunterladen
Am J Perinatol 2023; 40(15): 1695-1703
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740010
Original Article

A Comparison of Vaginal and Intramuscular Progesterone for the Prevention of Recurrent Preterm Birth

Heather A. Frey
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
,
Matthew M. Finneran
2   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina
,
Erinn M. Hade
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
3   Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
,
Colleen Waickman
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
,
Courtney D. Lynch
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
,
Jay D. Iams
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
,
Mark B. Landon
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
› Institutsangaben Funding None.
› Weitere Informationen
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective This study aimed to examine whether vaginal progesterone is noninferior to 17-α hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17OHP-C) in the prevention of recurrent preterm birth (PTB).

Study Design This retrospective cohort study included singleton pregnancies among women with a history of spontaneous PTB who received prenatal care at a single tertiary center from 2011 to 2016. Pregnancies were excluded if progesterone was not initiated prior to 24 weeks or the fetus had a major congenital anomaly. The primary outcome was PTB <37 weeks. A priori, noninferiority was to be established if the upper bound of the adjusted two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in PTB fell below 9%. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to carefully control for confounding associated with choice of treatment and PTB. Adjusted differences in PTB proportions were estimated via IPTW regression, with standard errors adjustment for multiple pregnancies per woman. Secondary outcomes included PTB <34 and <28 weeks, spontaneous PTB, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and gestational age at delivery.

Results Among 858 pregnancies, 41% (n = 353) received vaginal progesterone and 59% (n = 505) were given 17OHP-C. Vaginal progesterone use was more common later in the study period, and among women who established prenatal care later, had prior PTBs at later gestational ages, and whose race/ethnicity was neither non-Hispanic white nor non-Hispanic Black. Vaginal progesterone did not meet noninferiority criteria compared with 17-OHPC in examining PTB <37 weeks, with an IPTW adjusted difference of 3.4% (90% CI: −3.5, 10.3). For secondary outcomes, IPTW adjusted differences between treatment groups were generally small and CIs were wide.

Conclusion We could not conclude noninferiority of vaginal progesterone to 17OHP-C; however, women and providers may be willing to accept a larger difference (>9%) when considering the cost and availability of vaginal progesterone versus 17OHP-C. A well-designed randomized trial is needed.

Key Points

  • Vaginal progesterone is not noninferior to 17OHP-C.

  • PTB risk may be 10% higher with vaginal progesterone.

  • Associations did not differ based on obesity status.

Keywords

route of progesterone administration - preterm birth - prevention of preterm birth


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 26. Oktober 2020

Angenommen: 04. Oktober 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
14. Dezember 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Prediction and prevention of preterm birth. Practice Bulletin No. 234. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2021; 138 (02) e65-e90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Meis PJ, Klebanoff M, Thom E. et al; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Prevention of recurrent preterm delivery by 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. N Engl J Med 2003; 348 (24) 2379-2385
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 da Fonseca EB, Bittar RE, Carvalho MH, Zugaib M. Prophylactic administration of progesterone by vaginal suppository to reduce the incidence of spontaneous preterm birth in women at increased risk: a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188 (02) 419-424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Jarde A, Lutsiv O, Beyene J, McDonald SD. Vaginal progesterone, oral progesterone, 17-OHPC, cerclage, and pessary for preventing preterm birth in at-risk singleton pregnancies: an updated systematic review and network meta-analysis. BJOG 2019; 126 (05) 556-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 EPPPIC Group. Evaluating Progestogens for Preventing Preterm birth International Collaborative (EPPPIC): meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised controlled trials. Lancet 2021; 397 ;(10280): 1183-1194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Norman JE, Marlow N, Messow CM. et al; OPPTIMUM study group. Vaginal progesterone prophylaxis for preterm birth (the OPPTIMUM study): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet 2016; 387 (10033): 2106-2116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 O'Brien JM, Adair CD, Lewis DF. et al. Progesterone vaginal gel for the reduction of recurrent preterm birth: primary results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2007; 30 (05) 687-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Maher MA, Abdelaziz A, Ellaithy M, Bazeed MF. Prevention of preterm birth: a randomized trial of vaginal compared with intramuscular progesterone. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013; 92 (02) 215-222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Wajid R, Zafar M, Waheed F. Effectiveness of vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone for the prevention of preterm delivery. Ann King Edward Med Univ 2016; 22: 284-289
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bafghi AS, Bahrami E, Sekhavat L. Comparative study of vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone in the prevention of preterm delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Electron Physician 2015; 7 (06) 1301-1309
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Elimian A, Smith K, Williams M, Knudtson E, Goodman JR, Escobedo MB. A randomized controlled trial of intramuscular versus vaginal progesterone for the prevention of recurrent preterm birth. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2016; 134 (02) 169-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Shambhavi S, Bagga R, Bansal P, Kalra J, Kumar P. A randomised trial to compare 200 mg micronised progesterone effervescent vaginal tablet daily with 250 mg intramuscular 17 alpha hydroxy progesterone caproate weekly for prevention of recurrent preterm birth. J Obstet Gynaecol 2018; 38 (06) 800-806
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Choi SJ, Kwak DW, Kil K. et al; from The Preterm Birth Research Committee of the Korean Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine. Vaginal compared with intramuscular progestogen for preventing preterm birth in high-risk pregnant women (VICTORIA study): a multicentre, open-label randomised trial and meta-analysis. BJOG 2020; 127 (13) 1646-1654
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Saccone G, Khalifeh A, Elimian A. et al. Vaginal progesterone vs intramuscular 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate for prevention of recurrent spontaneous preterm birth in singleton gestations: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2017; 49 (03) 315-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) Publications Committee. The choice of progestogen for the prevention of preterm birth in women with singleton pregnancy and prior preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017; 216 (03) B11-B13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gee RE, Kuy S, Karas LO. Progesterone for prevention of preterm birth: shortcomings and unintended consequences of the Orphan Drug Act. Obstet Gynecol 2017; 130 (06) 1202-1206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Iams JD, Berghella V. Care for women with prior preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 203 (02) 89-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Edlow AG, Srinivas SK, Elovitz MA. Second-trimester loss and subsequent pregnancy outcomes: What is the real risk?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 197 (06) 581.e1-581.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Koullali B, van Kempen LEM, van Zijl MD. et al. A multi-centre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial to compare a cervical pessary with a cervical cerclage in the prevention of preterm delivery in women with short cervical length and a history of preterm birth - PC study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017; 17 (01) 215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983; 70 (01) 41-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Austin PC, Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med 2015; 34 (28) 3661-3679
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Joffe MM, Ten Have TR, Feldman HI, Kimmel SE. Model selection, confounder control, and marginal structural models: review and new applications. Am Stat 2004; 58: 272-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rosenbaum PR. Model-based direct adjustment. J Am Stat Assoc 1987; 82: 387-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Cole SR, Hernán MA. Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models. Am J Epidemiol 2008; 168 (06) 656-664
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Muller CJ, MacLehose RF. Estimating predicted probabilities from logistic regression: different methods correspond to different target populations. Int J Epidemiol 2014; 43 (03) 962-970
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Caritis SN, Venkataramanan R, Thom E. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network and Obstetric-Fetal Pharmacology Research Units Network. Relationship between 17-alpha hydroxyprogesterone caproate concentration and spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 210 (02) 128.e1-128.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Caritis SN, Sharma S, Venkataramanan R. et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Obstetrical-Fetal Pharmacology Research Units Network. Pharmacology and placental transport of 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate in singleton gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207 (05) 398.e1-398.e8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Co AL, Walker HC, Hade EM, Iams JD. Relation of body mass index to frequency of recurrent preterm birth in women treated with 17-alpha hydroxyprogesterone caproate. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 213 (02) 233.e1-233.e5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Heyborne KD, Allshouse AA, Carey JC. Does 17-alpha hydroxyprogesterone caproate prevent recurrent preterm birth in obese women?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015; 213 (06) 844.e1-844.e6
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar