MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4404006740 · doi:10.3310/wakv3677

The efficacy of sildenafil therapy in dismal prognosis early-onset intrauterine growth restriction: the STRIDER RCT

2024· article· en· W4404006740 sur OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Sharp, Christine Cornforth, Richard Jackson, J.A. Harrold, M. Turner, Louise C. Kenny, Philip N. Baker, Edward Johnstone, Asma Khalil, Peter von Dadelszen, Aris T. Papageorghiou, Brigitte Vollmer, Žarko Alfirević

Notice bibliographique

RevueEfficacy and Mechanism Evaluation · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBirth, Development, and Health
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesUniversity of British ColumbiaDepartment of Health and Social CareMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Social Care and Health ResearchPublic Health AgencyEfficacy and Mechanism Evaluation ProgrammeNational Institute for Health and Care Research
Mots-clésSildenafilRandomized controlled trialMedicineIntrauterine growth restrictionInternal medicineCardiologyBiologyPregnancy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background Severe early-onset intrauterine growth restriction is associated with stillbirth, neonatal death and neurodevelopmental impairment. There is no treatment for intrauterine growth restriction with timely delivery being the only management option. Placentas from intrauterine growth restriction pregnancies often show failure to remodel maternal spiral arteries leading to a persistent vasoactive responsiveness. Sildenafil, a phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor, potentiates naturally occurring nitrous oxide, encouraging vasodilation of vasoactive vessels. Previous studies in animal models and humans show recovery of placental function and improvement in fetal growth. The STRIDER trial aimed to address whether treatment with sildenafil is beneficial to fetal growth and perinatal and toddler outcomes. Methods The STRIDER trial was a superiority, randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial that was carried out in 19 fetal medicine units in the United Kingdom. Women with a singleton pregnancy between 22+0 and 29+6 weeks’ gestation, with severe early-onset intrauterine growth restriction, were asked to participate. Women were randomised (1 : 1) to receive either sildenafil 25-mg three times daily or placebo until 31+6 weeks’ gestation or delivery. Women were stratified by site and their gestational age at randomisation (before 26+0 or at 26+0 weeks or later). Severe intrauterine growth restriction was defined as a combination of estimated fetal weight or abdominal circumference below the 10th percentile and absent or reversed end-diastolic blood flow in the umbilical artery on Doppler velocimetry. The primary outcome was the time from randomisation to delivery, measured in days with a 1-week difference deemed to be clinically significant. The phase 2 study followed up all babies alive at discharge to assess for cardiovascular function and neurodevelopment at 2 years of age. Results Between 21 November 2014 and 6 July 2016, a total number of 135 women were recruited to the study, of these 70 were assigned to sildenafil and 65 to the placebo. No difference was found in the median randomisation to delivery interval between sildenafil [17 days (interquartile range 7–24)] and placebo [18 days (8–28), p = 0.23]. Live births [relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.33; p = 0.62], fetal deaths (relative risk 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 1.45; p = 0.64), neonatal deaths (relative risk 1.33, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 3.28; p = 0.53), and birthweight [mean difference −14 g (95% confidence interval −100 to 126); p = 0.81] did not differ between the treatment arms and no differences were found for other maternal or perinatal secondary outcomes. Eight serious adverse events were reported during the study (six in the placebo group and two in the sildenafil group); none of these were attributed to sildenafil. Seventy-five babies were discharged alive from the neonatal unit and of those 61 were available for follow-up with 32 treated with sildenafil and 29 with placebo. Of those that did not have a follow-up 1 baby died (placebo) and 3 declined follow-up and 10 were uncontactable. There was no difference in neurodevelopment, or blood pressure for infants treated with sildenafil versus placebo. Infants who received sildenafil had a greater head circumference compared to those who received placebo (median difference 49.25 cm, interquartile range 46.4–50.26 vs. 47.17 cm, 95% confidence interval 44.71 to 48.95). Conclusion Sildenafil did not prolong pregnancy or improve pregnancy outcomes. There was no effect from sildenafil treatment on infant neurodevelopment. Our data show that sildenafil should not be prescribed for fetal growth restriction. Trial registration This trial is registered as ISRCTN39133303. Funding This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) programme (NIHR award ref: 12/62/109) and is published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 11, No. 18. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,026

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,003
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,048
Tête enseignante GPT0,338
Écart entre enseignants0,290 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEfficacy and Mechanism EvaluationMême sujetBirth, Development, and HealthTravaux en français237 207