Cost effectiveness of nifedipine compared with atosiban in the treatment of threatened preterm birth (APOSTEL III trial).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of treatment with nifedipine compared with atosiban in women with threatened preterm birth. DESIGN: An economic analysis alongside a randomised clinical trial (the APOSTEL III study). SETTING: Obstetric departments of 12 tertiary hospitals and seven secondary hospitals in the Netherlands and Belgium. POPULATION: Women with threatened preterm birth between 25 and 34 weeks of gestation, randomised for tocolysis with either nifedipine or atosiban. METHODS: We performed an economic analysis from a societal perspective. We estimated costs from randomisation until discharge. Analyses for singleton and multiple pregnancies were performed separately. The robustness of our findings was evaluated in sensitivity analyses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean costs and differences were calculated per woman treated with nifedipine or atosiban. Health outcomes were expressed as the prevalence of a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes. RESULTS: Mean costs per patients were significantly lower in the nifedipine group [singleton pregnancies: €34,897 versus €43,376, mean difference (MD) -€8479 [95% confidence interval (CI) -€14,327 to -€2016)]; multiple pregnancies: €90,248 versus €102,292, MD -€12,044 (95% CI -€21,607 to € -1671). There was a non-significantly higher death rate in the nifedipine group. The difference in costs was mainly driven by a lower neonatal intensive care unit admission (NICU) rate in the nifedipine group. CONCLUSION: Treatment with nifedipine in women with threatened preterm birth results in lower costs when compared with treatment with atosiban. However, the safety of nifedipine warrants further investigation. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: In women with threatened preterm birth, tocolysis using nifedipine results in lower costs when compared with atosiban.

Nifedipine maintenance tocolysis and perinatal outcome: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Preterm birth is the leading cause of neonatal mortality and morbidity in developed countries. Whether continued tocolysis after 48 hours of rescue tocolysis improves neonatal outcome is unproven. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of maintenance tocolytic therapy with oral nifedipine on the reduction of adverse neonatal outcomes and the prolongation of pregnancy by performing an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for randomised controlled trials of maintenance tocolysis therapy with nifedipine in preterm labour. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected trials including pregnant women between 24 and 36(6/7)  weeks of gestation (gestational age, GA) with imminent preterm labour who had not delivered after 48 hours of initial tocolysis, and compared maintenance nifedipine tocolysis with placebo/no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The primary outcome was perinatal mortality. Secondary outcome measures were intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), necrotising enterocolitis (NEC), infant respiratory distress syndrome (IRDS), prolongation of pregnancy, GA at delivery, birthweight, neonatal intensive care unit admission, and number of days on ventilation support. Pre-specified subgroup analyses were performed. MAIN RESULTS: Six randomised controlled trials were included in this IPDMA, encompassing data from 787 patients (n = 390 for nifedipine; n = 397 for placebo/no treatment). There was no difference between the groups for the incidence of perinatal death (risk ratio, RR 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.35-5.33), intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) ≥ grade II (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.16-2.67), necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) (RR 1.15; 95% CI 0.50-2.65), infant respiratory distress syndrome (IRDS) (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.51-1.85), and prolongation of pregnancy (hazard ratio, HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.55-1.01). CONCLUSION: Maintenance tocolysis is not associated with improved perinatal outcome and is therefore not recommended for routine practice. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Nifedipine maintenance tocolysis is not associated with improved perinatal outcome or pregnancy prolongation.

Maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine in threatened preterm labour: 2-year follow up of the offspring in the APOSTEL II trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term effects of maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine on neurodevelopmental outcome of the infant. DESIGN, SETTING AND POPULATION: Follow up of infants of women who participated in a multicentre randomised controlled trial on maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine versus placebo. METHODS: Two years after the APOSTEL II trial on maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine versus placebo, we asked participants to complete the Ages and Stages Questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Infant development was measured in five domains. Developmental delay was defined as a score of ≤1 SD in one or more developmental domains. We performed exploratory subgroup analysis in women with preterm prolonged rupture of the membranes, and in women with a cervical length <10 mm at study entry. RESULTS: Of the 276 women eligible for follow up, 135 (52.5%) returned the questionnaire, encompassing data of 170 infants. At 2 years of age, infants of women with nifedipine maintenance tocolysis compared with placebo had a higher overall incidence of fine motor problems (22.2 versus 7.6%, OR 3.43, 95% CI 1.29-9.14, P = 0.01), and a lower incidence of poor problem-solving (21.1 versus 29.1%, OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.08-0.95, P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: This follow-up study revealed no clear benefit of nifedipine maintenance tocolysis at 2 years of age. As short-term adverse perinatal outcome was not reduced in the original APOSTEL II trial, we conclude that maintenance tocolysis does not appear to be beneficial at this time. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: No clear benefit of nifedipine maintenance tocolysis in preterm labour on 2-year infant outcome.