European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2026
An individual participant data network meta-analysis of the APOSTEL trials on the effect of tocolysis in threatened preterm birth between 30-33+6 weeks of gestation in twin pregnancies.
СтатьяNetwork Meta-AnalysisНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van Gils L, van der Windt L I, van Kaam A H, Roos C, Pajkrt E, Oudijk M A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Twin pregnancies have a substantial risk of preterm birth, but evidence on tocolytics is limited. We evaluated whether nifedipine or atosiban improves neonatal outcomes compared with placebo.
DESIGN: Individual participant data network meta-analysis (IPD-NMA) of two international multicentre randomised controlled trials (APOSTEL 3 and 8).
SETTING: The APOSTEL-3 compared nifedipine with atosiban, while the APOSTEL-8 compared atosiban with placebo.
POPULATION: Women with twin pregnancies and threatened preterm birth between 30+0 and 33+6 weeks.
METHODS: Analyses were performed at the infant level using generalised estimating equations to account for clustering within twin pairs.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adverse neonatal outcome: composite of neonatal morbidity or mortality.
RESULTS: A total of 179 women were included: 94 allocated to atosiban, 27 to nifedipine, and 58 to placebo. Prolongation beyond 48 h was not significantly increased with nifedipine (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68-1.36) or atosiban (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88-1.38). The composite adverse neonatal outcome occurred in 3.7% of neonates in the nifedipine group (2/54), 7.5% in the atosiban group (14/188), and 5.2% in the placebo group (6/116). Relative risks were 0.72 (95% CI 0.15-3.43) for nifedipine vs placebo, 1.44 (95% CI 0.57-3.64) for atosiban vs placebo, and 2.01 (95% CI 0.47-8.58) for atosiban vs nifedipine.
CONCLUSION: No clear benefit of nifedipine or atosiban over placebo on neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies with threatened preterm birth between 30+0 and 33+6 weeks was found.
DESIGN: Individual participant data network meta-analysis (IPD-NMA) of two international multicentre randomised controlled trials (APOSTEL 3 and 8).
SETTING: The APOSTEL-3 compared nifedipine with atosiban, while the APOSTEL-8 compared atosiban with placebo.
POPULATION: Women with twin pregnancies and threatened preterm birth between 30+0 and 33+6 weeks.
METHODS: Analyses were performed at the infant level using generalised estimating equations to account for clustering within twin pairs.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adverse neonatal outcome: composite of neonatal morbidity or mortality.
RESULTS: A total of 179 women were included: 94 allocated to atosiban, 27 to nifedipine, and 58 to placebo. Prolongation beyond 48 h was not significantly increased with nifedipine (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68-1.36) or atosiban (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88-1.38). The composite adverse neonatal outcome occurred in 3.7% of neonates in the nifedipine group (2/54), 7.5% in the atosiban group (14/188), and 5.2% in the placebo group (6/116). Relative risks were 0.72 (95% CI 0.15-3.43) for nifedipine vs placebo, 1.44 (95% CI 0.57-3.64) for atosiban vs placebo, and 2.01 (95% CI 0.47-8.58) for atosiban vs nifedipine.
CONCLUSION: No clear benefit of nifedipine or atosiban over placebo on neonatal outcomes in twin pregnancies with threatened preterm birth between 30+0 and 33+6 weeks was found.