DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13061
www.bjog.org
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
Centro de Investigacion en Salud Poblacional -CISAP- (Population Health Research Centre), Hospital GA Carlos G Durand, Buenos Aires,
Argentina c Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Materno Infantil Ramon Sarda, Buenos Aires, Argentina d Department of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital, University Basel, Basel, Switzerland e Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital
Materno Infantil de San Isidro, San Isidro, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina f Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of
Medicine, University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland g Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Donacion
Francisco Santojanni, Buenos Aires, Argentina h Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Frauenklinik, Kantonspital, St Gall, Switzerland
i
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Maternidad Nuestra Senora De Las Mercedes, San Miguel de Tucuman, Argentina
j
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland k Department of Obstetrics and
Gynaecology, Hospital Materno Infantil San Roque, Entre Ros, Argentina l Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Bernardino
Rivadavia, Buenos Aires, Argentina m Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Frauenklinik, Kantonspital, Winterthur, Switzerland
n
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Heroes de Malvinas, Merlo, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina o Department of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland p Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital
Magdalena V. de Martnez, General Pacheco, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina q Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Dr.
Cosme Argerich, Buenos Aires, Argentina r Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Carlos G Durand, Buenos Aires, Argentina
s
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Villa Dolores, Cordoba, Argentina t Hospital Virgen del Carmen, Zarate, Provincia de
Buenos Aires, Argentina u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Municipal Ostaciana B de Lavignolle, Moron, Provincia de
Buenos Aires, Argentina v Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Comunal de Tigre, Tigre, Provincia de Buenos Aires,
Argentina w Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital J. M. Penna, Buenos Aires, Argentina x Department of Obstetrics and
Gynaecology, Hospital Dr. T. Alvarez, Buenos Aires, Argentina y Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Interzonal Alberto
Antranik Eurnekian, Ezeiza, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina z Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital J. B. Iturraspe, Santa
Fe, Argentina aa Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Correspondence: B Martinez de Tejada, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, 30
Boulevard de la Cluse, 1211 Geneva 14, Switzerland. Email begona.martinezdetejada@hcuge.ch
b
trial.
80
to
Delivery at <32 and <34 weeks did not differ between the two
groups (12.9 versus 9.7%; [RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.72.5] and 19.7
versus 12.9% [RR 1.5; 95% CI 0.92.4], respectively). The
duration of tocolysis, hospitalisation, and recurrence of preterm
labour were comparable between groups. Neonatal morbidity
occurred in 44 (22.8%) cases on progesterone versus 35 (18.8%)
cases on placebo (RR: 1.2; 95% CI 0.821.8), whereas there were
4 (2%) neonatal deaths in each study group.
Conclusion There is no evidence that the daily administration of
Introduction
Preterm birth (PTB) (<37 weeks of gestation) is the leading
cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. In developed
countries, the incidence of preterm delivery varies between
7 and 12%.1,2 This rate is higher in developing countries
where there is limited availability of neonatal care and
there are poorer clinical outcomes.3,4 Infants born preterm
account for 75% of perinatal deaths and half of all childhood neurodevelopmental disabilities.5,6 Consequently, PTB
contributes to a large burden of disease, including high
immediate and long-term medical care costs, the need for
special education services and institutionalised care for
physically and mentally disabled infants.7,8
In many cases, PTB occurs after spontaneous preterm
labour (PTL) (preterm uterine contractions with cervical
effacement and/or dilatation) and intact membranes.9,10
Despite the identification of various risk factors, no intervention has been found to be effective for the reduction of
PTB in women with symptoms of PTL.11,12 Acute tocolysis
is effective in delaying the delivery of the fetus for 27 days
in the short term but it has not been shown to reduce long-term complications from preterm birth.1318 In addition,
studies have failed to show a beneficial effect of maintenance
tocolysis on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes.1922
In recent years, progesterone was found to be effective
for the prevention of PTB in women with a previous history of PTB and in those with a mid-trimester short cervix.2330 However, its effectiveness in women with PTL has
been less well evaluated with conflicting results reported.
Several small and unblinded clinical studies have reported a
beneficial effect of natural progesterone or 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17P) in reducing the duration of tocolysis treatment and preventing PTB.3134 Nevertheless, the
largest study published to date found no efficacy for the
prevention of PTB with the use of 17P.35 In an attempt to
Methods
The Prevention of Preterm Delivery with Vaginal Progesterone in Women with Preterm Labour (4P) study was an
international, multicentre, randomised, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing vaginal natural progesterone versus placebo in women with PTL.
81
the provision of unnecessary capsules and allowed the stratification of the recruited women in the two study groups
by gestational age at inclusion. Each centre was provided
initially with five boxes of each set and regularly supplied
with additional boxes as necessary.
Practical issues
Study participants were monitored using the following clinical and laboratory examinations, depending on local practices: temperature; heart rate and blood pressure
measurement; fetal heart rate monitoring; cervical examination; white blood cell count and C-reactive protein measurement; and urinary, genital and recto-vaginal
microbiological cultures. Women with positive culture
results were treated with specific antibiotics following the
local guidelines at each centre. For each PTL episode resulting in a new hospitalisation, the standard local protocol
was repeated and clinical data were collected. Regarding
Group B Streptococcus (GBS) prophylaxis, women were
screened for GBS colonisation at admission and received
intrapartum GBS antibiotic prophylaxis if colonised or if
unknown status and delivering preterm.
Usual care
82
Outcomes
The primary outcome was preterm delivery before 37 weeks
of gestation. Prespecified secondary outcomes were as follows.
Obstetrical outcomes: preterm delivery before 34 weeks
and before 32 weeks of gestation; duration of tocolysis; length of hospital stay for the initial episode; and
the overall number of re-admissions for PTL.
Neonatal outcomes: newborn birth weight; hospitalisation at the neonatal intensive care unit; a composite
estimate of neonatal morbidity including the following
variables: transient tachypnoea; respiratory distress syndrome; bronchopulmonary dysplasia; ventilatory support (continuous positive airway pressure, intubation),
necrotising enterocolitis; intraventricular haemorrhage;
periventricular leucomalacia; retinopathy; sepsis and
patent ductus arteriosus; and neonatal death.
Drug tolerance: local reactions (soreness, itching, bruising, and vaginal discharge) and systemic reactions (any
documented unusual sign or symptom possibly related
to drug administration).
Definitions of obstetrical and neonatal complications
were standardised across centres according to the World
Sample size
We calculated our sample size based on differences between
the two study groups in the likelihood of preterm delivery
before 37 weeks of gestation. Preterm delivery among
women with PTL receiving routine care was postulated to
occur in 3040% of cases.44 A sample of 626 women was
sufficient to detect a risk reduction from 30 to 20% in preterm delivery before 37 weeks with 80% power and a two
-sided type I error of 5%.
Statistical methods
The main statistical analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis using IBM SPSS (version 19; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and OPEN EPI softwares. Frequencies in
categorical variables were expressed as a number with the
Results
Of 1466 women hospitalised for PTL during the study period, 576 were eligible for inclusion into the study, of whom
191 declined to participate in the trial. In total, 385 women
were included and randomly allocated to progesterone
(n = 197) or placebo (n = 188). Six women (four in the
progesterone group and two in the placebo group) were
lost to follow up (no data on delivery and newborn). Data
from 379 women were included in the analysis, of which
193 were randomised to receive progesterone and 186 to
placebo (Figure 1).
For the per protocol analysis, 19 women (eight in the placebo group and 11 in the progesterone group) were excluded
83
Enrolment
Excluded (n = 1082)
Not meeting inclusion criteria (n = 890)
Declined to participate (n = 192)
Other reasons (n = 0)
Randomised (n = 385)
Allocation
Allocated to PROGESTERONE (n = 197)
Received allocated intervention (n = 197)
Follow up
Lost to follow up (No data from delivery because
delivered in other hospital) (n = 3)
Discontinued intervention (n = 0)
Analysis
Analysed (intention-to-treat) (n = 193)
Excluded from analysis per protocol (n = 11)
Randomised without meeting inclusion criteria (n = 6)
Stopped treatment (n = 5)
because of protocol violations (n = 10) or treatment interruption (n = 9; four cases of voluntary withdrawal by
women and five cases due to the decision made by the
attending physicians) leading to 360 women (Figure 1).
Baseline characteristics of the women included in the
two groups were comparable (Table 1). Included women
had a mean age of 27.6 years (SD 6.2), and a mean gestational age at study entry of 29.5 weeks (SD 2.7). There
were 136 (35.9%) nulliparous women and 91 (24.0%) had
a history of previous preterm delivery or late miscarriage.
Data on cervical length were available only for patients
from Swiss centres; data on fetal fibronectin were available
in 61 women from Switzerland.
The overall number of women with preterm delivery was
148 (39%) <37 weeks, 62 (16.4%) <34 weeks, and 36 out
of 317 women (11%) <32 weeks. There were 44 (11.6%)
cases of premature rupture of the membranes before term
(22 in each group) and 26 cases of delivery induced before
term (8/193 [4.1%] in the progesterone group and 18/186
[9.7%] in the placebo group; P = 0.05).
84
Progesterone (n = 193)
98/192
79/192
15/192
193/193
27.92
(51.0)
(41.1)
(7.8)
(100)
(6.47) [1842]
Placebo (n = 186)
92/184
85/184
7/184
186/186
27.34
(50.0)
(46.2)
(3.8)
(100)
(5.79) [1843]
187/193 (96.9)
58.98 (11.51) [40109]
183/186 (98.4)
58.42 (9.77) [3695]
183/193 (94.8)
10/193 (5.2)
174/183 (95.1)
9/183 (4.9)
82/190 (43.2)
108/190 (56.8)
86/184 (46.7)
98/184 (53.3)
170/193
23/193
19/193
63/193
2/193
46/193
37/193
19/192
193/193
29.50
(88.1)
(11.9)
(9.8)
(32.6)
(1.0)
(23.8)
(19.2)
(9.9)
(100)
(2.74) [2434]
162/186
24/186
23/186
73/186
1/186
39/186
37/186
19/186
186/186
29.51
(87.1)
(12.9)
(12.4)
(39.2)
(0.5)
(21.0)
(19.9)
(10.2)
(100)
(2.72) [2433]
124/193
19.35
27/191
12/26
193/193
3/193
158/193
15/193
22/193
(64.2)
(8.36) [445]
(14.1)
(46.2)
(100)
(1.5)
(81.0)
(7.6)
(11.1)
124/186
19.56
34/183
14/33
186/186
4/186
143/186
20/186
26/186
(66.7)
(8.15) [046]
(18.6)
(42.4)
(100)
(2.1)
(74.1)
(10.4)
(13.7)
CL, cervical length; fFN, fibronectin; SD, standard deviation; SEE score, socio-economic score.
Neonatal outcomes
Neonatal weight at birth, Apgar score at 5 min <7, neonatal intensive care unit hospitalisation, neonatal mortality
and the composite outcome of morbidity were also comparable between the two groups (Table 3).
85
Progesterone (n = 193)
36.05
82/193
38/193
21/163
48.00
13/193
6.00
45.00
41/193
191/193
(3.54) [2441]
(42.5)
(19.7)
(12.9)
(01740)
(6.7)
(097)
(0114)
(21.2)
(99.0)
77/182 (55.0)
37/182 (20.3)
20/154 (13.0)
Placebo (n = 186)
36.63
66/186
24/186
15/154
48.00
19/184
7.00
52.00
37/186
185/186
(3.11) [2541]
(35.5)
(12.9)
(9.7)
(01672)
(10.3)
(168)
(2112)
(19.9)
(99.5)
63/178 (35.4)
22/178 (12.4)
15/148(10.1)
P
0.09
0.20
0.10
0.48
0.84
0.29
0.09
0.13
0.84
>0.99
0.22
0.06
0.55
RR
95% CI
1.2
1.5
1.32
0.931.5
0.952.4
0.712.5
0.65
0.331.28
1.07
0.99
0.721.59
0.971.01
1.20
1.65
1.28
0.921.55
1.012.67
0.682.41
Discussion
Main findings
In women with PTL treated with acute tocolysis, treatment
with 200 mg of vaginal natural progesterone daily did not
reduce preterm delivery or improve perinatal outcomes.
Progesterone treatment had no effect on the duration of
tocolysis, the duration of the first or any subsequent hospital stays, or the rate of recurrence of PTL.
86
2880.00
7/193
4/193
57/191
44/193
(5004685)
(3.6)
(2.1)
(29.8)
(22.8)
Placebo (n = 186)
2955.00
5/186
4/186
47/185
35/186
(8204900)
(2.7)
(2.2)
(25.4)
(18.8)
RR
95% CI
0.5
0.82
>0.99
0.42
0.41
1.35
0.96
1.17
1.21
0.434.18
0.243.80
0.841.63
0.821.80
Interpretation
We included women with a short cervix as measured by
vaginal ultrasound (<10th centile for the gestational age at
inclusion),47 as well as women with marked clinical
changes of the cervix.4850 We included also women with
contractions and positive fibronectin test results, which is
another group at high risk for preterm delivery.26,41 Nevertheless, fibronectin was investigated in only 16% of the
women. Although our inclusion criteria were heterogeneous
due to the multiple centres participating in the study, the
high preterm delivery rate (39%) implies that the population was indeed at high risk for preterm delivery to assess
the effectiveness of progesterone in the prevention of this
outcome.
We investigated the effect of progesterone in women
in conjunction with acute tocolysis as previous studies
showed that the combination of progesterone with nifedipine
or b-mimetics had synergistic effects and the total dosage of
tocolytic medications could be reduced.5153 However, we
found neither a difference in the duration of tocolytic
treatment between the progesterone and the placebo group
nor an interaction between progesterone and the various
tocolytics.
Several randomised controlled studies have assessed the
effectiveness of progesterone on prolongation of pregnancy
or reduction of prematurity in women with PTL. Some
have used intramuscular 17P as maintenance tocolysis: Fac-
87
Conclusion
There is no evidence that the further administration of
200 mg daily of vaginal progesterone decreases PTB or
improves neonatal outcome in women with PTL following
tocolytic therapy.
88
Disclosure of interests
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure
form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on
request from the corresponding author). BMT has received
a travel grant from Besins Laboratory. All other authors
declare no other relationships or activities with companies
that might have an interest in the submitted work.
Contribution to authorship
BMT, MB and OI contributed to the design of the trial.
BMT, MB and OI wrote the grant application. BMT and
AK obtained funding for the study. All authors except
BWM participated in recruitment of participants and data
collection. BMT, VOG, MB, MCO, LK, VW, MVB and AK
analysed and interpreted the data. BMT, AK and BWM
drafted the manuscript. All authors critically reviewed the
manuscript. All authors (BMT, AK, MCO, CL, IH, DF, DS,
MH, GD, AB, SR, GLD, ES, EP, JA, FK, DN, MP, JCN, RP,
CT, RE, QT, GB, AM, BP, BWM, LK, VW, MB, VOG,
MVB, OI) except FS (who recently died) read and
approved the final manuscript before submission. BMT
accepts full responsibility for this work and acts as guarantor for the study.
Funding
The project was supported by grants from the University
Hospitals of Geneva (PRD-05103), the HUG Clinical
Research Center of the Swiss National Foundation (main
sponsor), Department of Reproductive Health and
Research, World Health Organization, Ministry of Health
of Ciudad Autonoma de Buenos Aires (grant for A Karolinski, resolution no. 2124/2011- Investigators career) and
a personal scholarship for Mrs MC Ocampo (degree no.
685/10). Besins Laboratory produced and supplied the
study drugs (utrogestan and placebo) free of charge. The
Acknowledgements
We thank the research nurses, research midwives and secretaries of our study consortium, including the residents,
nurses, midwives and gynaecologists of the participating
centres, for their help with participant recruitment and data
collection. We thank also B. Cerrutti, A. Gayet-Ageron, and
T Perneger for their help in data analysis and interpretation.
Special thanks to the members of the data safety monitoring
committee (J. Demoles, JJ Pasquier and F Goffinet) for
monitoring the trial and performing the interim analysis.
We thank Besins International, France, for the production
of study medication. We thank M. Merialdi, Department of
Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organization, for partial support of the implementation of the 4P
Trial in Argentina. We thank R Sudan for her editing work
of the final version of the paper.
Transparency statement
The manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent
account of the study being reported. We confirm that no
important aspects of the study have been omitted.
Data sharing
Patient-level data are available from the corresponding
author.
Appendix 1
List of participating departments and
collaborators
In Switzerland, the 4P group comprises:
1 Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva Faculty of Medicine, Geneva (global and Swiss coordinating centre): B Martinez de Tejada, O Irion, M Boulvain, M Tellenbach, V Othenin-Girard, E Vogele, R
Azbar.
2 University Hospital, University Basel, Basel: I Hosli, A Raggi, A Birkenmaier, S Kann.
3 University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern: D Surbek, K Scheibner, M Huguelet, E Amann, M Baumann, E Jakob.
4 Kantonales Frauenspital Chur, Chur: K Biedermann.
5 Frauenklinik Kantonspital Luzern, Lucerne: M Hodel.
6 Frauenklinik Kantonspital St Gall, St Gall: G Drack, T Fischer, K Pfau,
K Estermann.
7 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne: P Hohlfeld, S Gerber, S Rouiller-Cornu, R Capoccia Brugger, A Nessi, C Rodriguez-Maillot, PA Pradervand, P Bodenmann, S Fornage.
8 Frauenklinik Kantonspital Winterthur, Winterthur: E Prentl, E Amann.
9 University Hospital Zurich, Zurich: F Krahenmann, R Zimmermann.
In Argentina:
1 Centro de Investigacion en Salud Poblacional Population Health
Research Centre)/Hospital Durand, Ciudad Autonoma de Buenos
Aires (CABA) (Argentinean coordinating centre): A Karolinski, MV
Supporting Information
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the
online version of this article:
Data S1. Powerpoint slides summarising the study. n
89
References
1 Chang HH, Larson J, Blencowe H, Spong CY, Simpson JL, Lawn JE.
Preterm births in countries with a very high human development
indexauthors reply. Lancet 2013;381:13567.
2 Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ. Births: preliminary data for
2005. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2006;55:118.
3 Ngoc NT, Merialdi M, Abdel-Aleem H, Carroli G, Purwar M, Zavaleta
N, et al. Causes of stillbirths and early neonatal deaths: data from
7993 pregnancies in six developing countries. Bull World Health
Organ 2006;84:699705.
4 Feresu SA, Harlow SD, Welch K, Gillespie BW. Incidence of and
socio-demographic risk factors for stillbirth, preterm birth and low
birthweight among Zimbabwean women. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol
2004;18:15463.
5 Mercer B. Preterm premature rupture of the membranes. Obstet
Gynecol 2003;101:17893.
6 Hack M, Taylor HG, Klein N, Eiben R, Schatschneider C,
Mercuri-Minich N. School-age outcomes in children with birth
weights under 750 g. N Engl J Med 1994;331:7539.
7 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Kirmeyer S,
Mathews TJ, et al. Births: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep
2011;60:170.
8 Murray CJ, Vos T, Lozano R, Naghavi M, Flaxman AD, Michaud
C, et al. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and
injuries in 21 regions, 19902010: a systematic analysis for the
Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012;380:2197
223.
9 Lockwood CJ, Kuczynski E. Risk stratification and pathological
mechanisms in preterm delivery. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2001;15
(Suppl 2):7889.
10 Romero R, Gomez R, Chaiworapongsa T, Conoscenti G, Kim JC,
Kim YM. The role of infection in preterm labour and delivery.
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2001;15(Suppl 2):4156.
11 Lockwood CJ, Dudenhausen JW. New approaches to the prediction
of preterm delivery. J Perinat Med 1993;21:44152.
12 Copper RL, Goldenberg RL, Davis RO, Cutter GR, DuBard MB,
Corliss DK, et al. Warning symptoms, uterine contractions, and
cervical examination findings in women at risk of preterm delivery.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;162:74854.
13 Treatment of preterm labor with the b-adrenergic agonist ritodrine.
The Canadian Preterm Labor Investigators Group. N Engl J Med
1992;327:30812.
14 King JF, Grant A, Keirse MJ, Chalmers I. Beta-mimetics in preterm
labour: an overview of the randomized controlled trials. BJOG
1988;95:21122.
15 Romero R, Sibai BM, Sanchez-Ramos L, Valenzuela GJ, Veille JC,
Tabor B, et al. An oxytocin receptor antagonist (atosiban) in the
treatment of preterm labor: a randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial with tocolytic rescue. Am J Obstet Gynecol
2000;182:117383.
16 Niebyl JR, Blake DA, White RD, Kumor KM, Dubin NH, Robinson JC,
et al. The inhibition of premature labor with indomethacin. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 1980;136:101419.
17 Ferguson JE II, Dyson DC, Schutz T, Stevenson DK. A comparison of
tocolysis with nifedipine or ritodrine: analysis of efficacy and maternal,
fetal, and neonatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;163:10511.
18 Keirse MJ. The history of tocolysis. BJOG 2003;110(Suppl 20):
947.
19 Roos C, Spaanderman ME, Schuit E, Bloemenkamp KW, Bolte AC,
Cornette J, et al. Effect of maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine in
threatened preterm labor on perinatal outcomes: a randomized
controlled trial. JAMA 2013;309:417.
90
20 Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Dare MR, Middleton P. Oral b-mimetics for
maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev 2006:CD003927.
21 Han S, Crowther CA, Moore V. Magnesium maintenance therapy
for preventing preterm birth after threatened preterm labour.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD000940.
22 Papatsonis D, Flenady V, Liley H. Maintenance therapy with oxytocin
antagonists for inhibiting preterm birth after threatened preterm
labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD005938.
23 Meis PJ, Klebanoff M, Thom E, Dombrowski MP, Sibai B, Moawad
AH, et al. Prevention of recurrent preterm delivery by 17
a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. N Engl J Med 2003;348:237985.
24 da Fonseca EB, Bittar RE, Carvalho MH, Zugaib M. Prophylactic
administration of progesterone by vaginal suppository to reduce the
incidence of spontaneous preterm birth in women at increased risk:
a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study. Am J Obstet
Gynecol 2003;188:41924.
25 Preterm birth: what can be done? Lancet 2008;371:2.
26 Chandiramani M, Di Renzo GC, Gottschalk E, Helmer H, Henrich W,
Hoesli I, et al. Fetal fibronectin as a predictor of spontaneous
preterm birth: a European perspective. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
2011;24:3306.
27 Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee, with
assistance of Vincenzo Berghella. Progesterone and preterm birth
prevention: translating clinical trials data into clinical practice. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:37686.
28 Committee on Practice BulletinsObstetrics, The American College
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice bulletin no. 130:
prediction and prevention of preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol
2012;120:95473.
29 Su LL, Samuel M, Chong YS. Progestational agents for treating
threatened or established preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst
Rev 2010:CD006770.
30 Dodd JM, Jones L, Flenady V, Cincotta R, Crowther CA. Prenatal
administration of progesterone for preventing preterm birth in
women considered to be at risk of preterm birth. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev 2013;7:CD004947.
31 Borna S, Sahabi N. Progesterone for maintenance tocolytic therapy
after threatened preterm labour: a randomised controlled trial. Aust
N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;48:5863.
32 Bomba-Opon DA, Kosinska-Kaczynska K, Kosinski P, Wegrzyn P,
Kaczynski B, Wielgos M. Vaginal progesterone after tocolytic
therapy in threatened preterm labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
2012;25:11569.
33 Facchinetti F, Dante G, Venturini P, Paganelli S, Volpe A.
17a-hydroxy-progesterone effects on cervical proinflammatory agents
in women at risk for preterm delivery. Am J Perinatol 2008;25:5036.
34 Facchinetti F, Paganelli S, Comitini G, Dante G, Volpe A. Cervical
length changes during preterm cervical ripening: effects of
17-a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. Am J Obstet Gynecol
2007;196:453.e4514; discussion 421.
35 Rozenberg P, Chauveaud A, Deruelle P, Capelle M, Winer N,
Desbri
ere R, et al. Prevention of preterm delivery after successful
tocolysis in preterm labor by 17 a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate: a
randomized
controlled
trial.
Am
J
Obstet
Gynecol
2012;206:206.e2019.
36 Leitich H, Brunbauer M, Kaider A, Egarter C, Husslein P. Cervical
length and dilatation of the internal cervical os detected by vaginal
ultrasonography as markers for preterm delivery: a systematic
review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:146572.
37 Hoesli I, Tercanli S, Holzgreve W. Cervical length assessment by
ultrasound as a predictor of preterm labouris there a role for
routine screening? BJOG 2003;110(Suppl 20):615.
91