Protocol for probiotic therapy vs placebo for preterm prelabour rupture of membranes to prolong pregnancy duration (Pro-PPROM) trial.

BACKGROUND: Preterm prelabour rupture of membranes (PPROM) is a common preterm birth antecedent. Preterm infants experience increased adverse newborn outcome risks. Infection is a risk factor for early birth in PPROM. Current management is antibiotic therapy, antenatal corticosteroids and to plan delivery at 37 weeks gestation. The microbiota and probiotics are potentially protective and may improve outcomes. AIMS: The primary aim is to evaluate whether oral probiotic therapy (Lactobacillus fermentum CECT5716) administered during PPROM between 24 and 34 weeks gestation prolongs pregnancy duration. The secondary aim is to evaluate maternal and neonatal outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial in Australia. The population will be women with a singleton pregnancy and PPROM less than 34 weeks gestation. The intervention will be an oral probiotic therapy compared with a placebo control. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women still pregnant at seven days following PPROM. One-to-one randomisation will occur within 24 h of PPROM. The trial is powered (80%, alpha = 0.05) to detect an absolute percentage increase in the primary outcome of 30%, (from expected rate of 20% up to 50%). DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence for the effectiveness of the probiotic in prolonging pregnancy duration. Findings will inform the feasibility of a larger trial to examine the effect of oral probiotics on clinically important maternal and neonatal outcomes in PPROM.

Methenamine hippurate for preventing urinary tract infections.

BACKGROUND: Methenamine salts are often used as an alternative to antibiotics for the prevention of urinary tract infection (UTI). This review was first published in Issue 1, 2002 and updated in Issue 4, 2007. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of methenamine hippurate in preventing UTI. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (from 1950), EMBASE (from 1980), reference lists of articles and abstracts from conference proceedings without language restriction. Manufacturers' of methenamine salts were contacted for unpublished studies and contact was made with known investigators.Date of last search: June 2012 SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCT) and quasi-RCTs of methenamine hippurate used for the prevention of UTIs in all population groups were eligible. A comparison with a control/no treatment group was a prerequisite for selection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model and the results expressed as risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). An exploration of heterogeneity and a detailed description of results, grouped by population, was undertaken. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies (2032 participants) were included. Six studies (654 patients) reported symptomatic UTI and eight studies (796 patients) reported bacteriuria. Overall, study quality was mixed. The overall pooled estimates for the major outcome measures were not interpretable because of underlying heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses suggested that methenamine hippurate may have some benefit in patients without renal tract abnormalities (symptomatic UTI: RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.89; bacteriuria: RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83), but not in patients with known renal tract abnormalities (symptomatic UTI: RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.38 to 6.20; bacteriuria: RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.07). For short-term treatment duration (1 week or less) there was a significant reduction in symptomatic UTI in those without renal tract abnormalities (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.38). The rate of adverse events was low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Methenamine hippurate may be effective for preventing UTI in patients without renal tract abnormalities, particularly when used for short-term prophylaxis. It does not appear to work in patients with neuropathic bladder or in patients who have renal tract abnormalities. The rate of adverse events was low, but poorly described.There is a need for further large well-conducted RCTs to clarify this question, particularly for longer term use for people without neuropathic bladder.

WITHDRAWN: Pharmacological interventions for treating acute heterotopic ossification.

BACKGROUND: Heterotopic ossification (HO) is the formation of mature lamellar bone in soft tissue sites outside the skeleton. HO frequently complicates burns, arthroplasty, fractures, and spinal cord and brain injuries. It can impair joint function. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of medications to treat acute HO on radiological, symptomatic, functional impairment, and disability outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group specialised register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2004), EMBASE (1980 to August 2004), CINAHL (1982 to August 2004), other databases, reference lists of articles, and contacted trialists and drug companies. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of any medication for treating acute HO (confirmed by bone scintigraphy, radiography, ultrasonography, or biopsy) and which used radiography to grade post-treatment HO severity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the study quality and extracted data. We analysed two dichotomous outcomes: no progression in HO grade (versus progression) and improvement in HO grade (versus no improvement). MAIN RESULTS: Two randomised trials comparing disodium etidronate versus placebo were included (Ono 1988; Stover 1976), from which ninety-two participants with spinal cord injury had radiographically-proven HO at baseline. At the completion of the 12 week intervention, the Ono study but not the Stover study, suggested that disodium etidronate was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of successfully preventing the progression of radiographic HO grade, (relative risk (RR) 1.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) I 1.16 to 1.93; and RR 1.48; 95% CI 0.78 to 2.84 respectively) and a significantly greater likelihood of improvement in HO grade (RR 2.78; 95% CI 1.66 to 4.66; and RR 0.71; 95% CI 0.20 to 2.53 respectively). There was evidence of statistical heterogeneity for the latter outcome. Longer term radiographic, clinical or side effect outcomes were unavailable. Data was not pooled due to this heterogeneity and the inadequate duration of follow up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Given the absence of long term radiographic outcomes in the included studies, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of disodium etidronate or other pharmacological agents for the treatment of acute HO. It has been previously suggested that disodium etidronate acts by delaying, rather than preventing, the mineralization of HO, and that mineralization may occur after treatment cessation in many cases, thereby negating the benefit of disodium etidronate on eventual HO grade. Further studies are required to assess all pharmacological treatments for acute HO with sufficient follow-up duration.

High frequency oscillatory ventilation versus conventional ventilation for infants with severe pulmonary dysfunction born at or near term.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary disease is a major cause of mortality and morbidity in term and near term infants. Conventional ventilation (CV) has been used for many years but may lead to lung injury, require the subsequent use of more invasive treatment such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or result in death. There are some observational studies indicating that high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) may be more effective in these infants as compared to CV. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of HFOV as compared with CV on mortality and morbidity in infants born at 35 weeks gestational age or more with severe respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. SEARCH STRATEGY: Standard search methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review group were used. These included searches in January 2009 of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences and symposia proceedings, expert informants, and journal hand searching by the Cochrane Collaboration. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized trials comparing HFOV and CV in term or near term infants with intractable respiratory failure were included in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group were used. The investigators separately extracted, assessed and coded all data for each study. Any disagreement was resolved by discussion. Data were synthesized using risk ratio [RR with (95% confidence intervals, CI)] and mean difference (with standard deviation, SD). MAIN RESULTS: Two trials met the inclusion criteria. One trial involving the "elective" use of HFOV randomized 118 infants at the start of CV. The other trial of "rescue" HFOV randomized 81 infants with later respiratory failure on CV. Neither trial showed evidence of a reduction in mortality at 28 days or in failed therapy on the assigned mode of ventilation requiring cross-over to the other mode. Neither study reported significant differences in the risk of pulmonary air leak, chronic lung disease (28 days or more in oxygen) or intracranial injury. In the study of elective HFOV, there was no difference noted in days on a ventilator or days in hospital. In the one rescue study, there was no difference in the risk of needing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are no data from randomized controlled trials supporting the use of rescue HFOV in term or near term infants with severe pulmonary dysfunction. The area is complicated by diverse pathology in such infants and by the occurrence of other interventions (surfactant, inhaled nitric oxide, inotropes). Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the role of elective or rescue HFOV in near term and term infants with pulmonary dysfunction before widespread use of this mode of ventilation in such infants.