Pessary or progesterone to prevent preterm birth in women with short cervical length: protocol of the 4-6 year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial (Quadruple-P).

INTRODUCTION: Vaginal progesterone and a cervical pessary are both interventions that are investigated for the prevention of preterm birth (PTB). Thus far, beneficial or harmful effects of these interventions on long-term child health and development are described, but evidence is not robust enough to draw firm conclusions. With this follow-up study, we intent to investigate if progesterone or a pessary is superior for the prevention of PTB considering the child's health at 4-6 years of corrected age. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a follow-up study of the Quadruple-P trial; a multicentre, randomised clinical trial (NL42926.018.13, Eudractnumber 2013-002884-24) which randomises women with an asymptomatic midtrimester short cervix to daily progesterone or a pessary for the prevention of PTB. All children born to mothers who participated in the Quadruple-P study (n=628 singletons and n=332 multiples) will be eligible for follow-up at 4-6 years of corrected age. Children will be assessed using parental questionnaires. Main outcomes are child (neuro)development and behaviour. Other outcomes include child mortality, growth and general health. A composite of adverse child outcomes will be compared between the progesterone and pessary groups reporting OR and the corresponding 95% CI. Analyses will be performed separately for singletons and multiples and using the intention-to-treat approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Medical Research Ethics Committee from Amsterdam UMC confirmed that de Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) did not apply to our study (W20_481 #20.531). Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and shared with stakeholders and participants. This protocol is published before analysis of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register (NL9646).

Long-term outcomes following antenatal exposure to low-dose aspirin: study protocol for the 4-year follow-up of the APRIL randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The use of low-dose aspirin by pregnant women to prevent preterm pre-eclampsia is gradually increasing. The administration of aspirin during pregnancy improves perinatal outcome, which could translate into improved child outcome in the long term. However, antenatal exposure to aspirin could have adverse effects on child development that may manifest later in life. The aim of this follow-up study is to assess the long-term effects of antenatal exposure to low-dose aspirin compared with placebo on survival, (neuro)development, behaviour and general health at 4 years corrected age. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a follow-up study of the Dutch double-blind randomised controlled APRIL trial which assessed the effectiveness of treatment with aspirin (80 mg daily) compared with placebo for the prevention of preterm birth in women with a previous spontaneous preterm birth. Treatment was initiated before 16 weeks of gestation and continued until 36 weeks or birth. We aim to follow-up all 379 children born to women who participated in the APRIL trial and survived the neonatal period, at the corrected age of 4 years. The main outcomes are (neuro)development as assessed by the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, and behaviour as assessed by the Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire. Additional outcomes include mortality, growth and general health from birth up to 4 years, and a composite outcome including mortality, abnormal (neuro)development and problem behaviour. Analyses will be performed by intention-to-treat using a superiority design. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Institutional Review Board approval was obtained from the Medical Research Ethics Committee from Amsterdam Medical Center (no. W20 289#20.325). The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The APRIL trial (NTR5675, NL5553; EudraCT number 2015-003220-31) and the APRIL follow-up study (NL8950) are registered in the Dutch trial register. The study is funded by the Amsterdam Reproduction & Development research institute.

Long-term follow-up of children exposed in-utero to progesterone treatment for prevention of preterm birth: study protocol of the AMPHIA follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Preterm birth is one of the main problems in obstetrics, and the most important cause of neonatal mortality, morbidity and neurodevelopmental impairment. Multiple gestation is an important risk factor for preterm birth, with up to 50% delivering before 37 weeks. Progesterone has a role in maintaining pregnancy and is frequently prescribed to prevent (recurrent) preterm birth and improve pregnancy outcomes in high-risk patients. However, little is known about its long-term effects in multiple gestations. The objective of this follow-up study is to assess long-term benefits and harms of prenatal exposure to progesterone treatment in multiple gestations on child development. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a follow-up study of a multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial (AMPHIA trial, ISRCTN40512715). Between 2006 and 2009 women with a multiple gestation were randomised at 16-20 weeks of gestation to weekly injections 250 mg 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate or placebo, until 36 weeks of gestation or delivery. The current long-term follow-up will assess all children (n=1355) born to mothers who participated in the AMPHIA trial, at 11-14 years of age, with internationally validated questionnaires, completed by themselves, their parents and their teachers. MAIN OUTCOMES ARE CHILD COGNITION AND BEHAVIOUR: Additional outcomes are death (perinatal and up to age 14), gender identity, educational performance and health-related problems. We will use intention-to-treat analyses comparing experimental and placebo group. To adjust for the correlation between twins, general linear mixed-effects models will be used. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Amsterdam UMC MEC provided a waiver for the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (W20_234#20.268). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and summaries shared with stakeholders, patients and participants. This protocol is published before analysis of the results. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL8933.

Factors Associated with Negative Patient Experiences with Essure Sterilization.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to identify factors associated with negative patient experiences with Essure. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study and follow-up survey. SETTING: The study was conducted in an academic setting. PATIENTS: Patients included women who had an Essure placed between 2002 and 2017. METHODS: The hospitals' database was queried to identify subjects and charts were reviewed to confirm medical information. Subjects were invited by mail, e-mail, or phone call to participate a survey regarding symptoms and satisfaction with Essure. A comparison was made between women who reported a negative experience with Essure versus those who did not. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify subject or procedural characteristics associated with any negative experience with Essure sterilization. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-four women underwent Essure sterilization between 2002 and 2017, 42.3% of whom responded to the follow-up survey. Satisfaction with Essure was reported by 61.9% of respondents. Thirty-three percent of the respondents have undergone removal or desire removal of the device. The most frequent symptoms attributed to Essure were pelvic pain, dyspareunia, and vaginal bleeding. Forty-eight percent of the respondents were identified as having any negative experience with Essure. Factors associated with negative experiences with Essure included young age at placement (odds ratio [OR] 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-0.94; P < .001), high gravidity (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.14-1.71; P = .002), and absent history of abdominal surgery (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.12-1.00; P = .049). CONCLUSION: Young age at placement, high gravidity, and absent history of abdominal surgery are factors associated with negative patient experiences following Essure sterilization. A negative experience with Essure is common, although dissatisfaction with the device is not always attributable to symptoms. This information could be considered when counseling women who plan removal of Essure. IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT: Our study provides new follow-up data with respect to hysteroscopic sterilization. This research is the first to examine any cause for negative patient experiences with Essure. Understanding factors associated with negative patient experiences could improve patient counseling regarding the extent to which symptoms could be attributed to Essure as well as counseling women who want to undergo removal of the device. These factors could in turn prove to be predictors for successful resolution of symptoms after removal of Essure. Results of this study could also be used for developing future hysteroscopic sterilization techniques.