4.2 Article

Preventing recurrent preterm birth with 125 mg of 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate

期刊

JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 9, 页码 3119-3126

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jog.14903

关键词

17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate; gestational diabetes; glucose intolerance; low birthweight; premature birth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that weekly injections of 125 mg of 17-OHPC significantly reduced the risk of recurrent preterm birth among pregnant women.
Aim There is strong evidence that weekly intramuscular (IM) injections of 250 mg of 17-alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) reduce the risk of recurrent preterm birth (PTB); however, whether a lower dose of 17-OHPC could reduce the risk of recurrent PTB remains unclear. This study aimed to assess whether 125 mg of 17-OHPC reduces recurrent PTB among women with a prior singleton spontaneous PTB and cervical length >25 mm. Methods This retrospective cohort study at a tertiary-care medical center in Japan included women with a prior singleton spontaneous PTB between 20 and 36 weeks' gestation and cervical length >25 mm, between 2008 and 2018. Primary outcomes were PTB <37 and <34 weeks' gestation. We calculated the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a multiple logistic regression model. Gestational age at delivery was compared using the Kaplan-Meier survival curve and log-rank test. Results Overall, 173 women met the inclusion criteria. Eighty-four women received weekly injections of 125 mg of 17-OHPC, and 89 did not. Treatment with 125 mg of 17-OHPC significantly reduced the risk of recurrent spontaneous PTB <37 (aOR: 0.156 [95% CI: 0.049-0.497]) and <34 weeks' gestation (aOR: 0.156 [95% CI: 0.049-0.497]). The mean delivery gestational age was also significantly longer in the 17-OHPC group (log-rank p = 0.005). Conclusions In this study population, weekly IM injections of 125 mg of 17-OHPC reduced the risk of recurrent PTB <37 and <34 weeks' gestation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据