ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Postpartum hemorrhage is a leading cause of maternal mortality and morbidity around the globe. The novel low-suction vacuum hemorrhage device (VHD) provides an alternative treatment option for cases of postpartum hemorrhage when first-line uterotonic agents fail. This systematic review aims to review current data evaluating the overall efficacy and safety of VHDs in treating postpartum hemorrhage. METHODS: We searched CINAHL Ultimate, Academic Search Premier, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE with Full Text, and PubMed and reference lists of retrieved studies for eligible studies that included outcomes of effectiveness, efficacy, or safety. Two independent reviewers used Covidence.org to screen Titles and Abstracts for 69 studies of which six were included in the analysis. Secondary outcomes measured across studies included time to bleeding control, total device deployment time, and adverse effects. RESULTS: Six nonrandomized trials (N = 1018 participants) included studies conducted in Indonesia, the United States, Switzerland, and Canada. The VHDs were found to have 90% effectiveness in achieving bleeding control across the studies. For most patients, this was achieved in <5 min and required a total device deployment time of 3 h. Reported adverse events were not considered life-threatening, including endometritis in 11 patients and red blood cell transfusions in 38% of patients. CONCLUSION: VHDs have the potential to be used as a rapidly effective means for mechanical intervention of postpartum hemorrhage. The efficacy and safety of VHDs must be further studied at the randomized controlled trial level to determine their clinical usage.
Subject(s)
Postpartum Hemorrhage , Humans , Postpartum Hemorrhage/therapy , Female , PregnancyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Zuranolone, an oral version of allopregnanolone and neurosteroid, is a novel drug for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) and postpartum depression (PPD). AIM: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of zuranolone in the treatment of MDD and PPD. METHOD: A systematic search was conducted using EBSCOhost to simultaneously search Academic Search Premier, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL Ultimate, and MEDLINE with Full Text. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and completed a full-text review using Covidence. The quality of each study was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). A meta-analysis was then conducted using Review Manager (RevMan v5.4) software. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 127 results, with 6 articles fitting our inclusion and exclusion criteria. All 6 studies, comprising 1707 participants, had an overall low risk of bias. There was a significant decrease in HAM-D scores for MDD at 15 days versus placebo (MD - 2.40, 95% CI - 3.07 to - 1.63; p < .001). When pooling data for PDD, there was an overall significant decrease in HAM-D scores at 15 days versus placebo (MD - 4.06, 95% CI - 4.25 to - 3.87; p < .001). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that zuranolone can improve symptoms of PPD at 15 days; however, results were not clinically significant for MDD. Future research is needed to evaluate the long-term efficacy of zuranolone in PPD and the treatment efficacy in MDD.
