Search

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 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 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 ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12981869. Registered on 13th June 2018.

Additional file 1

BackgroundReducing preterm birth and stillbirth and improving outcomes for babies born too soon is essential to reduce under-5 mortality globally. In the context of a rapidly evolving evidence base and issues with extrapolating efficacy data from high- to low-income settings, an assessment of the evidence for maternal and newborn interventions specific to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) is required.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was done. We included all studies performed in LMICs since the Every Newborn Action Plan,1 between 2013 - 2018, which reported on interventions where the outcome assessed was reduction in preterm birth or stillbirthincidence and/or a reduction in preterm infant neonatal mortality. Evidence was categorised according to maternal or neonatal intervention groups and a narrative synthesis conducted.Findings179 studies (147 primary evidence studies and 32 systematic reviews) were identified in 82 LMICs. 81 studies reported on maternal interventions and 98 reported on neonatal interventions. Interventions in pregnant mothers which resulted in significant reductions in preterm birth and stillbirth were (i) multiple micronutrient supplementation and (ii) enhanced quality of antenatal care. Routine antenatal ultrasound in LMICs increasedidentification of fetal antenatal conditions but did not reduce stillbirth or preterm birth due to the absence of services to manage these diagnoses. Interventions in pre-term neonates which improved their survival included (i) feeding support including probiotics and (ii) thermal regulation. Improved provision of neonatal resuscitation did not improve pre-term mortality rates, highlighting the importance of post-resuscitation care. Communitymobilisation, for example through community education packages, was found to be an effective way of delivering interventions.ConclusionsEvidence supports the implementation of several low-cost interventions with the potential to deliver reductions in preterm birth and stillbirth and improve outcomes for preterm babies in LMICs. These, however, must be complemented by overall health systems strengthening to be effective. Quality improvement methodology and learning health systems approaches can provide important means of understanding and tackling implementation challenges within local contexts. Further pragmatic efficacy trials of interventions in LMICs are essential, particularly for interventions not previously tested in these contexts.

Cervical cerclage is an intervention which when given to the right women can prevent preterm birth and second-trimester fetal losses. A history-indicated cerclage should be offered to women who have had three or more preterm deliveries and/or mid-trimester losses. An ultrasound-indicated cerclage should be offered to women with a cervical length

Background: Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Early identification of women at risk is needed to plan management. Objective : To assess the performance of existing pre-eclampsia prediction models and to develop and validate models for pre-eclampsia using individual participant data meta-analysis. We also estimated the prognostic value of individual markers. Design: This was an individual participant data meta-analysis of cohort studies. Setting: Source data from secondary and tertiary care. Predictors: We identified predictors from systematic reviews, and prioritised for importance in an international survey. Primary outcomes Early-onset (delivery at = 34 weeks' gestation) and any-onset pre-eclampsia. Analysis: We externally validated existing prediction models in UK cohorts and reported their performance in terms of discrimination and calibration. We developed and validated 12 new models based on clinical characteristics, clinical characteristics and biochemical markers, and clinical characteristics and ultrasound markers in the first and second trimesters. We summarised the data set-specific performance of each model using a random-effects meta-analysis. Discrimination was considered promising for C-statistics of >= 0.7, and calibration was considered good if the slope was near 1 and calibration-in-the-large was near 0. Heterogeneity was quantified using l(2) and tau(2). A decision curve analysis was undertaken to determine the clinical utility (net benefit) of the models. We reported the unadjusted prognostic value of individual predictors for pre-eclampsia as odds ratios with 95% confidence and prediction intervals. Result The International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications network comprised 78 studies (3,570,993 singleton pregnancies) identified from systematic reviews of tests to predict pre-eclampsia. Twenty-four of the 131 published prediction models could be validated in 11 UK cohorts. Summary C-statistics were between 0.6 and 0.7 for most models, and calibration was generally poor owing to large between-study heterogeneity, suggesting model overfitting. The clinical utility of the models varied between showing net harm to showing minimal or no net benefit. The average discrimination for IPPIC models ranged between 0.68 and 0.83. This was highest for the second-trimester clinical characteristics and biochemical markers model to predict early-onset pre-eclampsia, and lowest for the first-trimester clinical characteristics models to predict any pre-eclampsia. Calibration performance was heterogeneous across studies. Net benefit was observed for International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications first and second-trimester clinical characteristics and clinical characteristics and biochemical markers models predicting any pre-eclampsia, when validated in singleton nulliparous women managed in the UK NHS. History of hypertension, parity, smoking, mode of conception, placental growth factor and uterine artery pulsatility index had the strongest unadjusted associations with pre-eclampsia. Limitations: Variations in study population characteristics, type of predictors reported, too few events in some validation cohorts and the type of measurements contributed to heterogeneity in performance of the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications models. Some published models were not validated because model predictors were unavailable in the individual participant data. Conclusion: For models that could be validated, predictive performance was generally poor across data sets. Although the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications models show good predictive performance on average, and in the singleton nulliparous population, heterogeneity in calibration performance is likely across settings. Future work: Recalibration of model parameters within populations may improve calibration performance. Additional strong predictors need to be identified to improve model performance and consistency. Validation, including examination of calibration heterogeneity, is required for the models we could not validate.