Uterine atony prophylaxis with carbetocin versus oxytocin and the risk of major haemorrhage during caesarean section: A retrospective cohort study.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/0310057X221140128
Nico Cs Terblanche, James E Sharman, Mark A Jones, Kye Gregory, David J Sturgess
{"title":"Uterine atony prophylaxis with carbetocin versus oxytocin and the risk of major haemorrhage during caesarean section: A retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Nico Cs Terblanche,&nbsp;James E Sharman,&nbsp;Mark A Jones,&nbsp;Kye Gregory,&nbsp;David J Sturgess","doi":"10.1177/0310057X221140128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Carbetocin and oxytocin are commonly recommended agents for active management of the third stage of labour. Evidence is inconclusive whether either one more effectively reduces the occurrence of important postpartum haemorrhage outcomes at caesarean section. We examined whether carbetocin is associated with a lower risk of severe postpartum haemorrhage (blood loss ≥ 1000 ml) in comparison with oxytocin for the third stage of labour in women undergoing caesarean section. This was a retrospective cohort study among women undergoing scheduled or intrapartum caesarean section between 1 January 2010 and 2 July 2015 who received carbetocin or oxytocin for the third stage of labour. The primary outcome was severe postpartum haemorrhage. Secondary outcomes included blood transfusion, interventions, third stage complications and estimated blood loss. Outcomes were examined overall and by timing of birth, scheduled versus intrapartum, using propensity score-matched analysis. Among 21,027 eligible participants, 10,564 women who received carbetocin and 3836 women who received oxytocin at caesarean section were included in the analysis. Carbetocin was associated with a lower risk of severe postpartum haemorrhage overall (2.1% versus 3.3%; odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 0.79; <i>P </i><<i> </i>0.001). This reduction was apparent irrespective of timing of birth. Secondary outcomes also favoured carbetocin over oxytocin. In this retrospective cohort study, the risk of severe postpartum haemorrhage associated with carbetocin was lower than that associated with oxytocin in women undergoing caesarean section. Randomised clinical trials are needed to further investigate these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":7746,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesia and Intensive Care","volume":"51 4","pages":"288-295"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesia and Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0310057X221140128","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Carbetocin and oxytocin are commonly recommended agents for active management of the third stage of labour. Evidence is inconclusive whether either one more effectively reduces the occurrence of important postpartum haemorrhage outcomes at caesarean section. We examined whether carbetocin is associated with a lower risk of severe postpartum haemorrhage (blood loss ≥ 1000 ml) in comparison with oxytocin for the third stage of labour in women undergoing caesarean section. This was a retrospective cohort study among women undergoing scheduled or intrapartum caesarean section between 1 January 2010 and 2 July 2015 who received carbetocin or oxytocin for the third stage of labour. The primary outcome was severe postpartum haemorrhage. Secondary outcomes included blood transfusion, interventions, third stage complications and estimated blood loss. Outcomes were examined overall and by timing of birth, scheduled versus intrapartum, using propensity score-matched analysis. Among 21,027 eligible participants, 10,564 women who received carbetocin and 3836 women who received oxytocin at caesarean section were included in the analysis. Carbetocin was associated with a lower risk of severe postpartum haemorrhage overall (2.1% versus 3.3%; odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 0.79; P <0.001). This reduction was apparent irrespective of timing of birth. Secondary outcomes also favoured carbetocin over oxytocin. In this retrospective cohort study, the risk of severe postpartum haemorrhage associated with carbetocin was lower than that associated with oxytocin in women undergoing caesarean section. Randomised clinical trials are needed to further investigate these findings.

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
子宫张力预防与催产素与剖腹产大出血的风险:一项回顾性队列研究。
催产素和催产素通常被推荐用于第三产程的主动管理。证据不确定是否任何一种更有效地减少发生重要的产后出血结果在剖腹产。我们研究了在剖宫产的第三产期妇女中,与催产素相比,卡贝催产素是否与产后严重出血(出血量≥1000 ml)的风险降低有关。这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象为2010年1月1日至2015年7月2日在第三产程接受卡贝菌素或催产素治疗的剖腹产妇女。主要结局是严重的产后出血。次要结局包括输血、干预、第三期并发症和估计失血量。使用倾向评分匹配分析,对结果进行总体检查,并通过分娩时间,计划与产时进行检查。在21027名符合条件的参与者中,10564名接受卡贝菌素的妇女和3836名在剖腹产时接受催产素的妇女被纳入分析。总体而言,卡贝菌素与较低的严重产后出血风险相关(2.1%对3.3%;优势比0.62;95%置信区间0.48 ~ 0.79;P 0.001)。这种减少与出生时间无关。次要结果也倾向于催产素而不是催产素。在这项回顾性队列研究中,剖腹产妇女使用卡贝菌素发生严重产后出血的风险低于使用催产素的风险。需要随机临床试验来进一步调查这些发现。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
150
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Anaesthesia and Intensive Care is an international journal publishing timely, peer reviewed articles that have educational value and scientific merit for clinicians and researchers associated with anaesthesia, intensive care medicine, and pain medicine.
期刊最新文献
Experiences and outcomes of patients participating in a perioperative shared decision-making pathway. JG Farrell and The Lung: An early description of intensive care delirium in literature. Promoting behavioural change by educating anaesthetists about the environmental impact of inhalational anaesthetic agents: A systematic review. MET call prevention. A cross-sectional study of the relationship between iron deficiency anaemia and chronic pain.
×
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