Cargando…

Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, the optimal time to initiate delivery is unclear because limitation of maternal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces m...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chappell, Lucy C, Brocklehurst, Peter, Green, Marcus E, Hunter, Rachael, Hardy, Pollyanna, Juszczak, Edmund, Linsell, Louise, Chiocchia, Virginia, Greenland, Melanie, Placzek, Anna, Townend, John, Marlow, Neil, Sandall, Jane, Shennan, Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6892281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31472930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31963-4
_version_ 1783476001108393984
author Chappell, Lucy C
Brocklehurst, Peter
Green, Marcus E
Hunter, Rachael
Hardy, Pollyanna
Juszczak, Edmund
Linsell, Louise
Chiocchia, Virginia
Greenland, Melanie
Placzek, Anna
Townend, John
Marlow, Neil
Sandall, Jane
Shennan, Andrew
author_facet Chappell, Lucy C
Brocklehurst, Peter
Green, Marcus E
Hunter, Rachael
Hardy, Pollyanna
Juszczak, Edmund
Linsell, Louise
Chiocchia, Virginia
Greenland, Melanie
Placzek, Anna
Townend, John
Marlow, Neil
Sandall, Jane
Shennan, Andrew
author_sort Chappell, Lucy C
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, the optimal time to initiate delivery is unclear because limitation of maternal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of neonatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS: In this parallel-group, non-masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management (usual care) with individual randomisation in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia from 34 to less than 37 weeks' gestation and a singleton or dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy. The co-primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal morbidity or recorded systolic blood pressure of at least 160 mm Hg with a superiority hypothesis. The co-primary perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission up to infant hospital discharge with a non-inferiority hypothesis (non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in incidence). Analyses were by intention to treat, together with a per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN01879376. The trial is closed to recruitment but follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2014, and Dec 10, 2018, 901 women were recruited. 450 women (448 women and 471 infants analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants analysed) to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group (289 [65%] women) compared with the expectant management group (338 [75%] women; adjusted relative risk 0·86, 95% CI 0·79–0·94; p=0·0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was significantly higher in the planned delivery group (196 [42%] infants) compared with the expectant management group (159 [34%] infants; 1·26, 1·08–1·47; p=0·0034). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group. INTERPRETATION: There is strong evidence to suggest that planned delivery reduces maternal morbidity and severe hypertension compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater neonatal morbidity. This trade-off should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision making on timing of delivery. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6892281
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68922812019-12-16 Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial Chappell, Lucy C Brocklehurst, Peter Green, Marcus E Hunter, Rachael Hardy, Pollyanna Juszczak, Edmund Linsell, Louise Chiocchia, Virginia Greenland, Melanie Placzek, Anna Townend, John Marlow, Neil Sandall, Jane Shennan, Andrew Lancet Article BACKGROUND: In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, the optimal time to initiate delivery is unclear because limitation of maternal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of neonatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS: In this parallel-group, non-masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management (usual care) with individual randomisation in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia from 34 to less than 37 weeks' gestation and a singleton or dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy. The co-primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal morbidity or recorded systolic blood pressure of at least 160 mm Hg with a superiority hypothesis. The co-primary perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission up to infant hospital discharge with a non-inferiority hypothesis (non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in incidence). Analyses were by intention to treat, together with a per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN01879376. The trial is closed to recruitment but follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2014, and Dec 10, 2018, 901 women were recruited. 450 women (448 women and 471 infants analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants analysed) to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group (289 [65%] women) compared with the expectant management group (338 [75%] women; adjusted relative risk 0·86, 95% CI 0·79–0·94; p=0·0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was significantly higher in the planned delivery group (196 [42%] infants) compared with the expectant management group (159 [34%] infants; 1·26, 1·08–1·47; p=0·0034). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group. INTERPRETATION: There is strong evidence to suggest that planned delivery reduces maternal morbidity and severe hypertension compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater neonatal morbidity. This trade-off should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision making on timing of delivery. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme. Elsevier 2019-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6892281/ /pubmed/31472930 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31963-4 Text en © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Chappell, Lucy C
Brocklehurst, Peter
Green, Marcus E
Hunter, Rachael
Hardy, Pollyanna
Juszczak, Edmund
Linsell, Louise
Chiocchia, Virginia
Greenland, Melanie
Placzek, Anna
Townend, John
Marlow, Neil
Sandall, Jane
Shennan, Andrew
Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial
title Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial
title_full Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial
title_fullStr Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial
title_short Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial
title_sort planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (phoenix): a randomised controlled trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6892281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31472930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31963-4
work_keys_str_mv AT chappelllucyc plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT brocklehurstpeter plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT greenmarcuse plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hunterrachael plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT hardypollyanna plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT juszczakedmund plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT linselllouise plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT chiocchiavirginia plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT greenlandmelanie plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT placzekanna plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT townendjohn plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT marlowneil plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT sandalljane plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT shennanandrew plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial
AT plannedearlydeliveryorexpectantmanagementforlatepretermpreeclampsiaphoenixarandomisedcontrolledtrial