Optimal treatment for women with acute hypertension in pregnancy; a randomized trial comparing intravenous labetalol versus nicardipine

{"title":"Optimal treatment for women with acute hypertension in pregnancy; a randomized trial comparing intravenous labetalol versus nicardipine","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.preghy.2024.101153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Blood pressure control in severe hypertension of pregnancy is crucial for mother and neonate. In absence of evidence, guidelines recommend either intravenous labetalol or nicardipine. We compared the effectiveness and safety of these two drugs in women with severe hypertension in pregnancy.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>We performed an open label randomized controlled trial. Women with a singleton pregnancy complicated by severe hypertension (systolic ≥ 160 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 110 mmHg) requiring intravenous antihypertensive treatment were randomized to intravenous labetalol or intravenous nicardipine. The primary outcome was a composite adverse neonatal outcome defined as severe Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS), Broncho Pulmonary Dysplasia (BPD), Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH) IIB or worse, Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC), or perinatal death defined as fetal death or neonatal death before discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).</p><p>Based on a power analysis, we estimated that 472 women (236 per group) needed to be included to detect a difference of 15% in the primary outcome with 90% power. The study was halted prematurely at 30 inclusions because of slow recruitment and trial fatigue.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Between August 2018 and April 2022, we randomized 30 women of which 16 were allocated to intravenous nicardipine and 14 to intravenous labetalol. The composite adverse neonatal outcome was not significantly different between the two groups (25 % versus 43 % OR 0.28 (95 % CI 0.05–1.43), p = 0.12)). Respiratory distress syndrome occurred more often in the labetalol group than in the nicardipine group (42.9 % versus 12.5 %). Neonatal hypoglycemia occurred more often in the nicardipine group than in the labetalol group (31 % versus 7 %). Time until blood pressure control was faster in women treated with nicardipine than in women treated with labetalol (45 (15–150 min vs. 120 (60–127,5) min).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In our prematurely halted small RCT, we were unable to provide evidence for the optimal choice of treatment for severe hypertension to improve neonatal outcome and/or to obtain faster blood pressure control. Differences in Respiratory distress syndrome and neonatal hypoglycemia between the groups might be the result of coincidental finding due to the small groups included in the study. A larger randomized trial would be needed to determine the safest and most efficacious (intravenous) therapy for severe hypertension in pregnancy. This study emphasizes the challenges of conducting a RCT for the optimal treatment for these women.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48697,"journal":{"name":"Pregnancy Hypertension-An International Journal of Womens Cardiovascular Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210778924001806/pdfft?md5=5b9d7dae3de0873870d28934c539e92b&pid=1-s2.0-S2210778924001806-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pregnancy Hypertension-An International Journal of Womens Cardiovascular Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210778924001806","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Blood pressure control in severe hypertension of pregnancy is crucial for mother and neonate. In absence of evidence, guidelines recommend either intravenous labetalol or nicardipine. We compared the effectiveness and safety of these two drugs in women with severe hypertension in pregnancy.

Study design

We performed an open label randomized controlled trial. Women with a singleton pregnancy complicated by severe hypertension (systolic ≥ 160 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥ 110 mmHg) requiring intravenous antihypertensive treatment were randomized to intravenous labetalol or intravenous nicardipine. The primary outcome was a composite adverse neonatal outcome defined as severe Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS), Broncho Pulmonary Dysplasia (BPD), Intraventricular Hemorrhage (IVH) IIB or worse, Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC), or perinatal death defined as fetal death or neonatal death before discharge from the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

Based on a power analysis, we estimated that 472 women (236 per group) needed to be included to detect a difference of 15% in the primary outcome with 90% power. The study was halted prematurely at 30 inclusions because of slow recruitment and trial fatigue.

Results

Between August 2018 and April 2022, we randomized 30 women of which 16 were allocated to intravenous nicardipine and 14 to intravenous labetalol. The composite adverse neonatal outcome was not significantly different between the two groups (25 % versus 43 % OR 0.28 (95 % CI 0.05–1.43), p = 0.12)). Respiratory distress syndrome occurred more often in the labetalol group than in the nicardipine group (42.9 % versus 12.5 %). Neonatal hypoglycemia occurred more often in the nicardipine group than in the labetalol group (31 % versus 7 %). Time until blood pressure control was faster in women treated with nicardipine than in women treated with labetalol (45 (15–150 min vs. 120 (60–127,5) min).

Conclusion

In our prematurely halted small RCT, we were unable to provide evidence for the optimal choice of treatment for severe hypertension to improve neonatal outcome and/or to obtain faster blood pressure control. Differences in Respiratory distress syndrome and neonatal hypoglycemia between the groups might be the result of coincidental finding due to the small groups included in the study. A larger randomized trial would be needed to determine the safest and most efficacious (intravenous) therapy for severe hypertension in pregnancy. This study emphasizes the challenges of conducting a RCT for the optimal treatment for these women.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
妊娠期急性高血压妇女的最佳治疗;静脉注射拉贝洛尔与尼卡地平相比较的随机试验
目的控制严重妊娠高血压患者的血压对母亲和新生儿至关重要。在缺乏证据的情况下,指南推荐静脉注射拉贝洛尔或尼卡地平。我们比较了这两种药物对患有严重妊娠高血压的妇女的有效性和安全性。单胎妊娠合并严重高血压(收缩压≥160 mmHg和/或舒张压≥110 mmHg)需要静脉降压治疗的妇女被随机分配到静脉注射拉贝洛尔或静脉注射尼卡地平中。主要结果是新生儿综合不良结局,即严重呼吸窘迫综合征(RDS)、支气管肺发育不良(BPD)、脑室内出血(IVH)IIB或更严重、坏死性小肠结肠炎(NEC)或围产期死亡,即胎儿死亡或新生儿重症监护室(NICU)出院前新生儿死亡。根据功率分析,我们估计需要纳入 472 名产妇(每组 236 人),才能以 90% 的功率检测出主要结果中 15% 的差异。由于招募缓慢和试验疲劳,研究在纳入 30 人时提前结束。结果2018 年 8 月至 2022 年 4 月间,我们对 30 名产妇进行了随机分配,其中 16 人被分配到静脉注射尼卡地平,14 人被分配到静脉注射拉贝洛尔。两组新生儿综合不良结局无明显差异(25% 对 43% OR 0.28 (95 % CI 0.05-1.43), p = 0.12))。拉贝洛尔组的呼吸窘迫综合征发生率高于尼卡地平组(42.9% 对 12.5%)。尼卡地平组新生儿低血糖发生率高于拉贝洛尔组(31%对7%)。尼卡地平组比拉贝洛尔组更快控制血压(45 (15-150 min vs. 120 (60-127,5) min)。结论 在这项过早终止的小型研究中,我们无法提供证据证明选择治疗严重高血压的最佳方法可改善新生儿预后和/或更快控制血压。各组间在呼吸窘迫综合征和新生儿低血糖方面的差异可能是由于研究中纳入的组别较少而偶然发现的结果。需要进行更大规模的随机试验,以确定治疗严重妊娠高血压最安全、最有效的(静脉)疗法。这项研究强调了为这些妇女提供最佳治疗而进行 RCT 所面临的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pregnancy Hypertension-An International Journal of Womens Cardiovascular Health
Pregnancy Hypertension-An International Journal of Womens Cardiovascular Health OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGYPERIPHERAL VASCULAR-PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
127
期刊介绍: Pregnancy Hypertension: An International Journal of Women''s Cardiovascular Health aims to stimulate research in the field of hypertension in pregnancy, disseminate the useful results of such research, and advance education in the field. We publish articles pertaining to human and animal blood pressure during gestation, hypertension during gestation including physiology of circulatory control, pathophysiology, methodology, therapy or any other material relevant to the relationship between elevated blood pressure and pregnancy. The subtitle reflects the wider aspects of studying hypertension in pregnancy thus we also publish articles on in utero programming, nutrition, long term effects of hypertension in pregnancy on cardiovascular health and other research that helps our understanding of the etiology or consequences of hypertension in pregnancy. Case reports are not published unless of exceptional/outstanding importance to the field.
期刊最新文献
Response to Letter to the Editor: Comment on Article: Aspirin resistance in pregnancy is associated with reduced interleukin-2 concentration in maternal serum Hyperaldosteronism secondary to renal agenesis: An unusual cause for hypertension in pregnancy Clinical maternal risk parameters for the occurrence of maternal and fetal complications during preeclampsia in Congolese women Determining the relationship between severity of proteinuria and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes in patients with preeclampsia Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1