Glyceryl trinitrate to reduce the need for manual removal of retained placenta following vaginal delivery: the GOT-IT RCT.


Journal

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)
ISSN: 2046-4924
Titre abrégé: Health Technol Assess
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9706284

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2019
Historique:
entrez: 9 1 2020
pubmed: 9 1 2020
medline: 21 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Retained placenta is associated with postpartum haemorrhage and can lead to significant maternal morbidity if untreated. The only effective treatment is the surgical procedure of manual removal of placenta, which is costly, requires skilled staff, requires an operative environment and is unpleasant for women. Small studies suggest that glyceryl trinitrate may be an effective medical alternative. To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of sublingual glyceryl trinitrate spray compared with placebo in reducing the need for manual removal of placenta in women with retained placenta after vaginal delivery following the failure of current management. A group-sequential randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial with a cost-effectiveness analysis. There were 29 obstetric units in the UK involved in the study. There were 1107 women (glyceryl trinitrate group, Glyceryl trinitrate spray was administered to 541 women in the intervention group, and a placebo was administered to 563 women in the control group. Four primary outcomes were defined: (1) clinical - the need for manual removal of placenta, (2) safety - measured blood loss, (3) patient sided - satisfaction with treatment and side effects and (4) economic - cost-effectiveness of both treatments using the UK NHS perspective. Secondary clinical outcomes included a > 15% decrease in haemoglobin level, time from randomisation to delivery of placenta in theatre, the need for earlier manual removal of placenta than planned, increase in heart rate or decrease in blood pressure, requirement for blood transfusion, requirement for general anaesthesia, maternal pyrexia, and sustained uterine relaxation requiring additional uterotonics. No difference was observed between the glyceryl trinitrate group and the control group for the placenta remaining undelivered within 15 minutes of study treatment (93.3% vs. 92%; odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.04; Glyceryl trinitrate spray did not increase the delivery of retained placenta within 15 minutes of administration when compared with the placebo, and was not cost-effective for medical management of retained placenta. More participants reported palpitations and required a blood transfusion in the glyceryl trinitrate group. Further research into alternative methods of medical management of retained placenta is required. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88609453. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in A retained placenta is diagnosed when, following the birth of a baby, the placenta is not delivered. When this situation occurs, women are at risk of bleeding heavily. The only way to treat a retained placenta is for a trained doctor to remove it by an operation in theatre. This procedure can be painful and upsetting. Furthermore, the timing of the operation can interrupt mother–baby bonding immediately after giving birth. The study tested if the use of glyceryl trinitrate spray, given as two puffs under the woman’s tongue following the diagnosis of retained placenta, may help the placenta to deliver without an operation. The study also tested if glyceryl trinitrate was safe, assessed what women thought about the treatment and compared the costs of glyceryl trinitrate with those of current operative management. This study included 1107 women diagnosed with retained placenta following the birth of their baby. Half of the women were treated with glyceryl trinitrate spray and the other half were treated with a dummy spray, which looked identical but did not contain the active treatment. If the placenta delivered within 15 minutes of the study treatment being taken, this was considered a success. However, if the placenta did not deliver within 15 minutes and the woman had to have her placenta removed by an operation, then this was viewed as unsuccessful. Neither the woman nor the clinical staff knew if the treatment given was the glyceryl trinitrate spray or the dummy spray. The results indicate that, although women were happy to be involved in the trial and the treatment was safe, the use of glyceryl trinitrate spray did not reduce the need for the placenta to be manually removed by an operation in theatre. Furthermore, glyceryl trinitrate spray was not cost-effective.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Retained placenta is associated with postpartum haemorrhage and can lead to significant maternal morbidity if untreated. The only effective treatment is the surgical procedure of manual removal of placenta, which is costly, requires skilled staff, requires an operative environment and is unpleasant for women. Small studies suggest that glyceryl trinitrate may be an effective medical alternative.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of sublingual glyceryl trinitrate spray compared with placebo in reducing the need for manual removal of placenta in women with retained placenta after vaginal delivery following the failure of current management.
DESIGN
A group-sequential randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial with a cost-effectiveness analysis.
SETTING
There were 29 obstetric units in the UK involved in the study.
PARTICIPANTS
There were 1107 women (glyceryl trinitrate group,
INTERVENTIONS
Glyceryl trinitrate spray was administered to 541 women in the intervention group, and a placebo was administered to 563 women in the control group.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Four primary outcomes were defined: (1) clinical - the need for manual removal of placenta, (2) safety - measured blood loss, (3) patient sided - satisfaction with treatment and side effects and (4) economic - cost-effectiveness of both treatments using the UK NHS perspective. Secondary clinical outcomes included a > 15% decrease in haemoglobin level, time from randomisation to delivery of placenta in theatre, the need for earlier manual removal of placenta than planned, increase in heart rate or decrease in blood pressure, requirement for blood transfusion, requirement for general anaesthesia, maternal pyrexia, and sustained uterine relaxation requiring additional uterotonics.
RESULTS
No difference was observed between the glyceryl trinitrate group and the control group for the placenta remaining undelivered within 15 minutes of study treatment (93.3% vs. 92%; odds ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.04;
CONCLUSIONS
Glyceryl trinitrate spray did not increase the delivery of retained placenta within 15 minutes of administration when compared with the placebo, and was not cost-effective for medical management of retained placenta. More participants reported palpitations and required a blood transfusion in the glyceryl trinitrate group. Further research into alternative methods of medical management of retained placenta is required.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88609453.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in
A retained placenta is diagnosed when, following the birth of a baby, the placenta is not delivered. When this situation occurs, women are at risk of bleeding heavily. The only way to treat a retained placenta is for a trained doctor to remove it by an operation in theatre. This procedure can be painful and upsetting. Furthermore, the timing of the operation can interrupt mother–baby bonding immediately after giving birth. The study tested if the use of glyceryl trinitrate spray, given as two puffs under the woman’s tongue following the diagnosis of retained placenta, may help the placenta to deliver without an operation. The study also tested if glyceryl trinitrate was safe, assessed what women thought about the treatment and compared the costs of glyceryl trinitrate with those of current operative management. This study included 1107 women diagnosed with retained placenta following the birth of their baby. Half of the women were treated with glyceryl trinitrate spray and the other half were treated with a dummy spray, which looked identical but did not contain the active treatment. If the placenta delivered within 15 minutes of the study treatment being taken, this was considered a success. However, if the placenta did not deliver within 15 minutes and the woman had to have her placenta removed by an operation, then this was viewed as unsuccessful. Neither the woman nor the clinical staff knew if the treatment given was the glyceryl trinitrate spray or the dummy spray. The results indicate that, although women were happy to be involved in the trial and the treatment was safe, the use of glyceryl trinitrate spray did not reduce the need for the placenta to be manually removed by an operation in theatre. Furthermore, glyceryl trinitrate spray was not cost-effective.

Autres résumés

Type: plain-language-summary (eng)
A retained placenta is diagnosed when, following the birth of a baby, the placenta is not delivered. When this situation occurs, women are at risk of bleeding heavily. The only way to treat a retained placenta is for a trained doctor to remove it by an operation in theatre. This procedure can be painful and upsetting. Furthermore, the timing of the operation can interrupt mother–baby bonding immediately after giving birth. The study tested if the use of glyceryl trinitrate spray, given as two puffs under the woman’s tongue following the diagnosis of retained placenta, may help the placenta to deliver without an operation. The study also tested if glyceryl trinitrate was safe, assessed what women thought about the treatment and compared the costs of glyceryl trinitrate with those of current operative management. This study included 1107 women diagnosed with retained placenta following the birth of their baby. Half of the women were treated with glyceryl trinitrate spray and the other half were treated with a dummy spray, which looked identical but did not contain the active treatment. If the placenta delivered within 15 minutes of the study treatment being taken, this was considered a success. However, if the placenta did not deliver within 15 minutes and the woman had to have her placenta removed by an operation, then this was viewed as unsuccessful. Neither the woman nor the clinical staff knew if the treatment given was the glyceryl trinitrate spray or the dummy spray. The results indicate that, although women were happy to be involved in the trial and the treatment was safe, the use of glyceryl trinitrate spray did not reduce the need for the placenta to be manually removed by an operation in theatre. Furthermore, glyceryl trinitrate spray was not cost-effective.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31912780
doi: 10.3310/hta23700
pmc: PMC6970217
doi:

Substances chimiques

Vasodilator Agents 0
Nitroglycerin G59M7S0WS3

Banques de données

ISRCTN
['ISRCTN88609453']

Types de publication

Journal Article Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1-72

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 12/29/01
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Fiona C Denison has received funding from Dilafor AB (Solna, Sweden) outside the submitted work. Jane E Norman has received funding from Dilafor AB and GlaxoSmithKline plc (Middlesex, UK) outside the submitted work and declares membership of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Maternal Newborn and Child Health Panel. Jane Norman was a member of the HTA and Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Editorial Board. John Norrie declares grants from the University of Aberdeen and the University of Edinburgh during the conduct of the study and membership of the following NIHR boards: Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Decision-making Committee, HTA Commissioning Board, HTA Commissioning Sub-Board (Expression of Interest), HTA Funding Boards Policy Group, HTA General Board, HTA post-board funding teleconference, NIHR Clinical Trials Unit Standing Advisory Committee, NIHR HTA and EME Editorial Board and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Impact Review Panel. Julia Lawton declares membership of the HTA General Board.

Références

Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008;87(2):222-5
pubmed: 18231892
BMJ. 1995 Jul 1;311(6996):42-5
pubmed: 7613329
BMJ. 1995 Jul 22;311(6999):251-3
pubmed: 7627048
Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jun;77(6):863-7
pubmed: 2030858
Anesthesiology. 1990 Oct;73(4):787
pubmed: 2121072
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 May 24;18(1):36
pubmed: 28539111
Obstet Gynecol. 1995 Dec;86(6):1002-6
pubmed: 7501321
Int J Obstet Anesth. 1995 Jan;4(1):14-6
pubmed: 15636964
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1993 Jan;48(1):15-8
pubmed: 8449256
Biopharm Drug Dispos. 1993 Mar;14(2):107-18
pubmed: 8453021
Trials. 2016 Jun 01;17(1):267
pubmed: 27245155
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Dec;213(6):864.e1-864.e11
pubmed: 26226556
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 1997;261(1):1-7
pubmed: 9451516
Can J Anaesth. 1991 Oct;38(7):939-40
pubmed: 1742836
Trials. 2006 May 11;7:13
pubmed: 16689989
BMJ Open. 2017 Sep 18;7(9):e017134
pubmed: 28928192
Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Jan;77(1):69-76
pubmed: 1984230
Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2003;56(2):61-4
pubmed: 12900527
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2004 Sep;287(3):R680-5
pubmed: 15142834
Br Med J. 1882 Mar 18;1(1107):377
pubmed: 20750143
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Feb;37(1):20-4
pubmed: 9075542
Anesthesiology. 1989 Jul;71(1):172-3
pubmed: 2502047
Am J Cardiol. 1990 Jun 4;65(21):43J-45J
pubmed: 2112337
Cardiology. 1990;77(4):303-10
pubmed: 2127377
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Nov 12;(11):CD007708
pubmed: 26558329
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;31(1):37-42
pubmed: 21280991
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005 Dec;91(3):228-32
pubmed: 16226759
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1992;42(3):341-2
pubmed: 1577055
Trials. 2016 Apr 11;17:195
pubmed: 27066777

Auteurs

Fiona C Denison (FC)

Tommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health Research, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Kathryn F Carruthers (KF)

Tommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health Research, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Jemma Hudson (J)

Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Gladys McPherson (G)

Centre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Graham Scotland (G)

Health Economics Research Unit, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Sheonagh Brook-Smith (S)

Simpson's Centre for Reproductive Health, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Cynthia Clarkson (C)

Tommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health Research, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Mathilde Peace (M)

Tommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health Research, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Jane Brewin (J)

Tommy's, Nicholas House, London, UK.

Gin Nie Chua (GN)

Health Economics Research Unit, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Nina Hallowell (N)

Ethox Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Jane E Norman (JE)

Tommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health Research, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Julia Lawton (J)

Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

John Norrie (J)

Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit/Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH