C-STICH2: emergency cervical cerclage to prevent miscarriage and preterm birth-study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Cervical cerclage
Economic evaluation
Miscarriage
Preterm birth
Qualitative process evaluation
Randomised controlled trial
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Aug 2021
11 Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
04
12
2020
accepted:
16
07
2021
entrez:
12
8
2021
pubmed:
13
8
2021
medline:
14
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cervical cerclage is a recognised treatment to prevent late miscarriage and pre-term birth (PTB). Emergency cervical cerclage (ECC) for cervical dilatation with exposed unruptured membranes is less common and the potential benefits of cerclage are less certain. A randomised control trial is needed to accurately assess the effectiveness of ECC in preventing pregnancy loss compared to an expectant approach. C-STICH2 is a multicentre randomised controlled trial in which women presenting with cervical dilatation and unruptured exposed membranes at 16 + 0 to 27 + 6 weeks gestation are randomised to ECC or expectant management. Trial design includes 18 month internal pilot with embedded qualitative process evaluation, minimal data set and a within-trial health economic analysis. Inclusion criteria are ≥16 years, singleton pregnancy, exposed membranes at the external os, gestation 16 + 0-27 + 6 weeks, and informed consent. Exclusion criteria are contraindication to cerclage, cerclage in situ or previous cerclage in this pregnancy. Randomisation occurs via an online service in a 1:1 ratio, using a minimisation algorithm to reduce chance imbalances in key prognostic variables (site, gestation and dilatation). Primary outcome is pregnancy loss; a composite including miscarriage, termination of pregnancy and perinatal mortality defined as stillbirth and neonatal death in the first week of life. Secondary outcomes include all core outcomes for PTB. Two-year development outcomes will be assessed using general health and Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised (PARCA-R) questionnaires. Intended sample size is 260 participants (130 each arm) based on 60% rate of pregnancy loss in the expectant management arm and 40% in the ECC arm, with 90% power and alpha 0.05. Analysis will be by intention-to-treat. To date there has been one small trial of ECC in 23 participants which included twin and singleton pregnancies. This small trial along with the largest observational study (n = 161) found ECC to prolong pregnancy duration and reduce deliveries before 34 weeks gestation. It is important to generate high quality evidence on the effectiveness of ECC in preventing pregnancy loss, and improve understanding of the prevalence of the condition and frequency of complications associated with ECC. An adequately powered RCT will provide the highest quality evidence regarding optimum care for these women and their babies. ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12981869 . Registered on 13th June 2018.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cervical cerclage is a recognised treatment to prevent late miscarriage and pre-term birth (PTB). Emergency cervical cerclage (ECC) for cervical dilatation with exposed unruptured membranes is less common and the potential benefits of cerclage are less certain. A randomised control trial is needed to accurately assess the effectiveness of ECC in preventing pregnancy loss compared to an expectant approach.
METHODS
METHODS
C-STICH2 is a multicentre randomised controlled trial in which women presenting with cervical dilatation and unruptured exposed membranes at 16 + 0 to 27 + 6 weeks gestation are randomised to ECC or expectant management. Trial design includes 18 month internal pilot with embedded qualitative process evaluation, minimal data set and a within-trial health economic analysis. Inclusion criteria are ≥16 years, singleton pregnancy, exposed membranes at the external os, gestation 16 + 0-27 + 6 weeks, and informed consent. Exclusion criteria are contraindication to cerclage, cerclage in situ or previous cerclage in this pregnancy. Randomisation occurs via an online service in a 1:1 ratio, using a minimisation algorithm to reduce chance imbalances in key prognostic variables (site, gestation and dilatation). Primary outcome is pregnancy loss; a composite including miscarriage, termination of pregnancy and perinatal mortality defined as stillbirth and neonatal death in the first week of life. Secondary outcomes include all core outcomes for PTB. Two-year development outcomes will be assessed using general health and Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised (PARCA-R) questionnaires. Intended sample size is 260 participants (130 each arm) based on 60% rate of pregnancy loss in the expectant management arm and 40% in the ECC arm, with 90% power and alpha 0.05. Analysis will be by intention-to-treat.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
To date there has been one small trial of ECC in 23 participants which included twin and singleton pregnancies. This small trial along with the largest observational study (n = 161) found ECC to prolong pregnancy duration and reduce deliveries before 34 weeks gestation. It is important to generate high quality evidence on the effectiveness of ECC in preventing pregnancy loss, and improve understanding of the prevalence of the condition and frequency of complications associated with ECC. An adequately powered RCT will provide the highest quality evidence regarding optimum care for these women and their babies.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12981869 . Registered on 13th June 2018.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34380528
doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05464-6
pii: 10.1186/s13063-021-05464-6
pmc: PMC8356468
doi:
Types de publication
Clinical Trial Protocol
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
529Subventions
Organisme : Health Technology Assessment Programme
ID : 16/151/01
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
BMJ. 2014 Dec 19;349:g7731
pubmed: 25527114
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015 Apr;94(4):352-8
pubmed: 25644964
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008 Jan;28(1):24-7
pubmed: 18259893
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Oct;201(4):375.e1-8
pubmed: 19788970
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;117(3):663-671
pubmed: 21446209
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jan;127(1):49-58
pubmed: 26646133
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2017 Sep;30(17):2046-2050
pubmed: 27628770
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jul;126(1):125-35
pubmed: 26241265
Arch Dis Child. 2013 Dec;98(12):955-8
pubmed: 24030249
Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2013 May;68(5):379-88
pubmed: 23624963
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Sep 18;13:117
pubmed: 24047204
BJOG. 2018 Dec;125(13):1716
pubmed: 29916205
Med Educ. 2006 Apr;40(4):314-21
pubmed: 16573666
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2008 Jan;50(1):58-62
pubmed: 18173632
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Oct;189(4):907-10
pubmed: 14586323
Qual Health Res. 2016 Nov;26(13):1753-1760
pubmed: 26613970