Vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in twin gestations. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to January 31, 2023), Cochrane databases, Google Scholar, bibliographies, and conference proceedings. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials that compared vaginal progesterone to placebo or no treatment in asymptomatic women with a twin gestation. METHODS: The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The primary outcome was preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse perinatal outcomes. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. We assessed the risk of bias in each included study, heterogeneity, publication bias, and quality of evidence, and performed subgroup and sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: Eleven studies (3401 women and 6802 fetuses/infants) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among all twin gestations, there were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and placebo or no treatment groups in the risk of preterm birth <34 weeks (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.17; high-quality evidence), <37 weeks (relative risk, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.06; high-quality evidence), and <28 weeks (relative risk, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.55; moderate-quality evidence), and spontaneous preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.18; high-quality evidence). Vaginal progesterone had no significant effect on any of the perinatal outcomes evaluated. Subgroup analyses showed that there was no evidence of a different effect of vaginal progesterone on preterm birth <34 weeks of gestation related to chorionicity, type of conception, history of spontaneous preterm birth, daily dose of vaginal progesterone, and gestational age at initiation of treatment. The frequencies of preterm birth <37, <34, <32, <30, and <28 weeks of gestation and adverse perinatal outcomes did not significantly differ between the vaginal progesterone and placebo or no treatment groups in unselected twin gestations (8 studies; 3274 women and 6548 fetuses/infants). Among twin gestations with a transvaginal sonographic cervical length <30 mm (6 studies; 306 women and 612 fetuses/infants), vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant decrease in the risk of preterm birth occurring at <28 to <32 gestational weeks (relative risks, 0.48-0.65; moderate- to high-quality evidence), neonatal death (relative risk, 0.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.11-0.92; moderate-quality evidence), and birthweight <1500 g (relative risk, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.88; high-quality evidence). Vaginal progesterone significantly reduced the risk of preterm birth occurring at <28 to <34 gestational weeks (relative risks, 0.41-0.68), composite neonatal morbidity and mortality (relative risk, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.98), and birthweight <1500 g (relative risk, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.94) in twin gestations with a transvaginal sonographic cervical length ≤25 mm (6 studies; 95 women and 190 fetuses/infants). The quality of evidence was moderate for all these outcomes. CONCLUSION: Vaginal progesterone does not prevent preterm birth, nor does it improve perinatal outcomes in unselected twin gestations, but it appears to reduce the risk of preterm birth occurring at early gestational ages and of neonatal morbidity and mortality in twin gestations with a sonographic short cervix. However, more evidence is needed before recommending this intervention to this subset of patients.

Vaginal progesterone is as effective as cervical cerclage to prevent preterm birth in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a short cervix: updated indirect comparison meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: An indirect comparison meta-analysis published in 2013 reported that both vaginal progesterone and cerclage are equally efficacious for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a sonographic short cervix. The efficacy of vaginal progesterone has been challenged after publication of the OPPTIMUM study. However, this has been resolved by an individual patient-data meta-analysis (Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218:161-180). OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of vaginal progesterone and cerclage in preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a midtrimester sonographic short cervix. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to March 2018); Cochrane databases, bibliographies, and conference proceedings. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials comparing vaginal progesterone to placebo/no treatment or cerclage to no cerclage in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a sonographic cervical length <25 mm. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Updated systematic review and adjusted indirect comparison meta-analysis of vaginal progesterone vs cerclage using placebo/no cerclage as the common comparator. The primary outcomes were preterm birth <35 weeks of gestation and perinatal mortality. Pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. RESULTS: Five trials comparing vaginal progesterone vs placebo (265 women) and 5 comparing cerclage vs no cerclage (504 women) were included. Vaginal progesterone, compared to placebo, significantly reduced the risk of preterm birth <35 and <32 weeks of gestation, composite perinatal morbidity/mortality, neonatal sepsis, composite neonatal morbidity, and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (RRs from 0.29 to 0.68). Cerclage, compared to no cerclage, significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <37, <35, <32, and <28 weeks of gestation, composite perinatal morbidity/mortality, and birthweight <1500 g (RRs from 0.64 to 0.70). Adjusted indirect comparison meta-analyses did not show statistically significant differences between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the reduction of preterm birth or adverse perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Vaginal progesterone and cerclage are equally effective for preventing preterm birth and improving perinatal outcomes in women with a singleton gestation, previous spontaneous preterm birth, and a midtrimester sonographic short cervix. The choice of treatment will depend on adverse events and cost-effectiveness of interventions and patient/physician's preferences.

Vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a short cervix: a meta-analysis of individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of vaginal progesterone for preventing preterm birth and adverse perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a short cervix has been questioned after publication of the OPPTIMUM study. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether vaginal progesterone prevents preterm birth and improves perinatal outcomes in asymptomatic women with a singleton gestation and a midtrimester sonographic short cervix. STUDY DESIGN: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL (from their inception to September 2017); Cochrane databases; bibliographies; and conference proceedings for randomized controlled trials comparing vaginal progesterone vs placebo/no treatment in women with a singleton gestation and a midtrimester sonographic cervical length ≤25 mm. This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. The primary outcome was preterm birth <33 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes included adverse perinatal outcomes and neurodevelopmental and health outcomes at 2 years of age. Individual patient data were analyzed using a 2-stage approach. Pooled relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Data were available from 974 women (498 allocated to vaginal progesterone, 476 allocated to placebo) with a cervical length ≤25 mm participating in 5 high-quality trials. Vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth <33 weeks of gestation (relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-0.81; P = .0006; high-quality evidence). Moreover, vaginal progesterone significantly decreased the risk of preterm birth <36, <35, <34, <32, <30, and <28 weeks of gestation; spontaneous preterm birth <33 and <34 weeks of gestation; respiratory distress syndrome; composite neonatal morbidity and mortality; birthweight <1500 and <2500 g; and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (relative risks from 0.47-0.82; high-quality evidence for all). There were 7 (1.4%) neonatal deaths in the vaginal progesterone group and 15 (3.2%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-1.07; P = .07; low-quality evidence). Maternal adverse events, congenital anomalies, and adverse neurodevelopmental and health outcomes at 2 years of age did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Vaginal progesterone decreases the risk of preterm birth and improves perinatal outcomes in singleton gestations with a midtrimester sonographic short cervix, without any demonstrable deleterious effects on childhood neurodevelopment.

Progesterone vaginal capsule versus vaginal gel for luteal support in normoresponder women undergoing long agonist IVF/ICSI cycles.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of two different vaginal progesterone forms, administered for luteal phase support, on pregnancy outcomes in normoresponder women aged < 35, who underwent long agonist IVF/ICSI-ET cycles. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was designed. Normoresponders with primary infertility, who un-derwent IVF/ICSI-ET cycles employing GnRH analogue and who received progesterone as either capsule or gel form for LPS following a single embryo transfer, were analyzed. The cycles were categorized into two groups: micronized progesterone vaginal capsule 600 mg/day (Group 1, n = 78) and progesterone vaginal gel 180 mg/day (Group 2, n = 99). Positive ß-hCG, clinical pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy rates were analyzed. RESULTS: Both, demographic and stimulation characteristics were comparable between the groups. No difference was observed between the capsule and the gel groups regarding positive ß-hCG (33.3% and 28.3%, respectively; p = 0.580), clinical pregnancy (26.9% and 22.2%, respectively; p = 0.584), and ongoing pregnancy rates (21.8% and 20.2%, respectively; p = 0.942) after treatment completion. CONCLUSIONS: In long agonist IVF/ICSI-ET cycles, positive ß-hCG, clinical pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy rates do not significantly differ between normoresponder patients receiving micronized progesterone vaginal capsule and those receiv-ing progesterone vaginal gel for LPS.

Vaginal progesterone vs. cervical cerclage for the prevention of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix, previous preterm birth, and singleton gestation: a systematic review and indirect comparison metaanalysis.

OBJECTIVE: No randomized controlled trial has compared vaginal progesterone and cervical cerclage directly for the prevention of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix in the mid trimester, singleton gestation, and previous spontaneous preterm birth. We performed an indirect comparison of vaginal progesterone vs cerclage using placebo/no cerclage as the common comparator. STUDY DESIGN: Adjusted indirect metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Four studies that evaluated vaginal progesterone vs placebo (158 patients) and 5 studies that evaluated cerclage vs no cerclage (504 patients) were included. Both interventions were associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth at <32 weeks of gestation and composite perinatal morbidity and mortality compared with placebo/no cerclage. Adjusted indirect metaanalyses did not show statistically significant differences between vaginal progesterone and cerclage in the reduction of preterm birth or adverse perinatal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Based on state-of-the-art methods for indirect comparisons, either vaginal progesterone or cerclage are equally efficacious in the prevention of preterm birth in women with a sonographic short cervix in the mid trimester, singleton gestation, and previous preterm birth. Selection of the optimal treatment needs to consider adverse events, cost and patient/clinician preferences.

Progestogens to prevent preterm birth in twin pregnancies: an individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is the principal factor contributing to adverse outcomes in multiple pregnancies. Randomized controlled trials of progestogens to prevent preterm birth in twin pregnancies have shown no clear benefits. However, individual studies have not had sufficient power to evaluate potential benefits in women at particular high risk of early delivery (for example, women with a previous preterm birth or short cervix) or to determine adverse effects for rare outcomes such as intrauterine death. METHODS/DESIGN: We propose an individual participant data meta-analysis of high quality randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of progestogen treatment in women with a twin pregnancy. The primary outcome will be adverse perinatal outcome (a composite measure of perinatal mortality and significant neonatal morbidity). Missing data will be imputed within each original study, before data of the individual studies are pooled. The effects of 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate or vaginal progesterone treatment in women with twin pregnancies will be estimated by means of a random effects log-binomial model. Analyses will be adjusted for variables used in stratified randomization as appropriate. Pre-specified subgroup analysis will be performed to explore the effect of progestogen treatment in high-risk groups. DISCUSSION: Combining individual patient data from different randomized trials has potential to provide valuable, clinically useful information regarding the benefits and potential harms of progestogens in women with twin pregnancy overall and in relevant subgroups.

Vaginal progesterone in women with an asymptomatic sonographic short cervix in the midtrimester decreases preterm delivery and neonatal morbidity: a systematic review and metaanalysis of individual patient data.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of vaginal progesterone in asymptomatic women with a sonographic short cervix (≤ 25 mm) in the midtrimester reduces the risk of preterm birth and improves neonatal morbidity and mortality. STUDY DESIGN: Individual patient data metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Five trials of high quality were included with a total of 775 women and 827 infants. Treatment with vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of preterm birth <33 weeks (relative risk [RR], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.80), <35 weeks (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.55-0.88), and <28 weeks (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.30-0.81); respiratory distress syndrome (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.30-0.76); composite neonatal morbidity and mortality (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.40-0.81); birthweight <1500 g (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.80); admission to neonatal intensive care unit (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.94); and requirement for mechanical ventilation (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.98). There were no significant differences between the vaginal progesterone and placebo groups in the rate of adverse maternal events or congenital anomalies. CONCLUSION: Vaginal progesterone administration to asymptomatic women with a sonographic short cervix reduces the risk of preterm birth and neonatal morbidity and mortality.

Progesterone effects on preterm birth in high-risk pregnancies: a randomized placebo-controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the prophylactic administration of vaginal progesterone would reduce the preterm birth rate in high-risk population including singleton and twin pregnancies. METHODS: This was a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study that included 150 high-risk pregnancies. Risk groups included prior spontaneous preterm birth, twin pregnancy, and uterine malformation. Micronized progesterone or placebo (100 mg) was administered daily by vaginal suppository between 24 and 34 weeks of gestation. We compared progesterone and placebo groups for incidence of preterm labor and preterm delivery. Data were compared by χ² analysis and Fisher exact test. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant difference in the rate of preterm labor between placebo and progesterone groups (45.7 vs. 25%, respectively; p < 0.05). More women delivered before 37 weeks in placebo group (57.2%) than in progesterone group (40%; p < 0.05). Administering progesterone also reduced the preterm birth before 34 weeks of gestation. The difference between placebo and progesterone group was statistically significant (24.3 vs. 8.8%; p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in neonatal death between placebo and progesterone groups. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic vaginal progesterone reduced the rate of preterm labor and preterm delivery in high-risk pregnancies.

Comparison of ovulation induction and pregnacy outcomes in IVF patients with normal ovarian reserve who underwent long protocol with recombinant-FSH and highly purified-hMG.

OBJECTIVE: Gonadotropins used in controlled ovarian stimulation have been increasing in number. Beside the recombinant preparations such as rec-FSH, rec-LH and h-hMG human-derived preparations have entered the market. We decided to compare the effects of rec-FSH and HP-hMG with GnRHa on embryo quality and pregnancy outcome in women undergoing an IVF cycle. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this study, data of 87 patients who had applied to our center from 2007 to 2008 and who had met all inclusion criteria, were analyzed. The patients underwent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with HP-hMG, rec-FSH following down-regulation with a GnRHa in a long protocol, selected according to determined criteria and acquired embryo via IVF transfer. RESULTS: Of the 87 patients, 44 were stimulated with rec-FSH and 43 with HP-hMG. Distribution of infertility causes was similar between the groups. Duration of gonadotropin administration (p=0.677, Student's t-test) and the total dose of gonadotropin received (p=0.392, Student's t-test) were similar between the two groups. The fertilization rate of the rec-FSH group was significantly higher than the HP-hMG group (p=0.001, Mann-Whitney U test). No significant differences were observed between the study groups in biochemical, clinical and ongoing pregnancy parameters. CONCLUSION: The higher oocyte yield with rec-FSH does not result in higher quality embryos. LH activity in combination with FSH activity positively affected the oocyte and embryo maturation. Therefore, when we consider the clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates there is no inferiority of HP-hMG in controlled ovarian stimulation.