Abstract
Aims This is an official guideline of the German Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (DGGG), the Austrian Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (ÖGGG) and the Swiss Society for Gynecology and Obstetrics (SGGG). The aim of this guideline is to improve the prediction, prevention and management of preterm birth based on evidence obtained from recent scientific literature, the experience of the members of the guideline commission and the views of self-help groups.
Methods Based on the international literature, the members of the participating medical societies and organizations developed Recommendations and Statements. These were adopted following a formal process (structured consensus conference with neutral moderation, voting was done in writing using the Delphi method to achieve consensus).
Recommendations Part I of this short version of the guideline lists Statements and Recommendations on the epidemiology, etiology, prediction and primary and secondary prevention of preterm birth.
Key words: preterm birth, preterm labor, cervical insufficiency, preterm premature rupture of membranes
I Guideline Information
Guidelines program
For information on the guidelines program, please refer to the end of the guideline.
Citation format
Prevention and Therapy of Preterm Birth. Guideline of the DGGG, OEGGG and SGGG (S2k Level, AWMF Registry Number 015/025, February 2019) – Part 1 with Recommendations on the Epidemiology, Etiology, Prediction, Primary and Secondary Prevention of Preterm Birth. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2019; 79: 800–812
Guideline documents
The complete long version, a slide version of this guideline and a guideline report on the methodological approach used, including the management of conflicts of interest, are available in German on the homepage of the AWMF: http://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/015-025.html
Guideline authors ( Table 1 )
Table 1 The following medical societies/working groups/organizations/associations were interested in participating in the compilation of the guideline text and in the consensus conference and nominated representatives who attended the consensus conference.
| Author Mandate holder |
DGGG working group (AG)/AWMF/ non-AWMF medical society/organization/association |
|---|---|
| Prof. Dr. Harald Abele | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Geburtshilfe und Pränatalmedizin (AGG) – Sektion Frühgeburt |
| Prof. Dr. Franz Bahlmann | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ultraschall in der Medizin e. V. (DEGUM) |
| Dr. Ivonne Bedei | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft Kinder- und Jugendgynäkologie e. V. (AGKJ) |
| Prof. Dr. Richard Berger | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG) |
| Dr. Klaus Doubek | Berufsverband der Frauenärzte e. V. (BVF) |
| Prof. Dr. Ursula Felderhoff-Müser | Gesellschaft für neonatale und pädiatrische Intensivmedizin (GNPI) |
| Prof. Dr. Herbert Fluhr | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Immunologie in Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (AGIM) |
| PD Dr. Dr. Yves Garnier | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Geburtshilfe und Pränatalmedizin (AGG) – Sektion Frühgeburt |
| Dr. Susanne Grylka-Baeschlin | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hebammenwissenschaften (DGHWi) |
| Prof. Dr. Hanns Helmer | Österreichische Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (OEGGG) |
| Prof. Dr. Egbert Herting | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Kinder- und Jugendmedizin (DGKJ) |
| Prof. Dr. Markus Hoopmann | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Ultraschalldiagnostik in Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (ARGUS) |
| Prof. Dr. Irene Hösli | Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (SGGG) |
| Prof. Dr. Dr. h. c. Udo Hoyme | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Infektionen und Infektionsimmunologie (AGII) |
| Alexandra Jendreizeck | Bundesverband “Das frühgeborene Kind” [Federal Association “The preterm Infant”] |
| Dr. Harald Krentel | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Frauengesundheit in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit (FIDE) |
| PD Dr. Ruben Kuon | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (DGGG) |
| Dr. Wolf Lütje | DGGG – Deutsche Gesellschaft für psychosomatische Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe e. V. (DGPFG) |
| Silke Mader | European Foundation for the Care of the Newborn Infants (EFCNI) |
| PD Dr. Holger Maul | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Perinatale Medizin (DGPM) |
| Prof. Dr. Werner Mendling | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Infektionen und Infektionsimmunologie (AGII) |
| Barbara Mitschdörfer | Bundesverband “Das frühgeborene Kind” [Federal Association “The preterm Infant”] |
| Tatjana Nicin | Deutscher Hebammenverband (DHV) |
| Dr. Dirk Olbertz | Gesellschaft für neonatale und pädiatrische Intensivmedizin (GNPI) |
| Prof. Dr. Werner Rath | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Pränatal- und Geburtsmedizin (DGPGM) |
| Prof. Dr. Claudia Roll | Deutsche Gesellschaft für Perinatale Medizin (DGPM) |
| PD Dr. Dietmar Schlembach | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Geburtshilfe und Pränatalmedizin (AGG) – Sektion Präeklampsie |
| Prof. Dr. Ekkehard Schleußner | DGGG – Deutsche Gesellschaft für psychosomatische Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe e. V. (DGPFG) |
| Prof. Dr. Florian Schütz | DGGG – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Immunologie in Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (AGIM) |
| Prof. Dr. Vanadin Seifert-Klauss | DGGG – Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Fortpflanzungsmedizin e. V. (DGGEF) |
| Susanne Steppat | Deutscher Hebammenverband (DHV) |
| Prof. Dr. Daniel Surbek | Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe (SGGG) |
Abbreviations
- AFP
alpha-fetoprotein
- AUC
area under the curve
- CI
confidence interval
- COX
cyclooxygenase
- CPAP
continuous positive airway pressure
- CRP
C-reactive protein
- CTG
cardiotocography
- fFN
fetal fibronectin
- FIRS
fetal inflammatory response syndrome
- GBS
group B streptococcus
- GW
week of gestation
- IGFBP-1
insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-1
- IL-6
interleukin-6
- NEC
necrotizing enterocolitis
- NICU
neonatal intensive care unit
- NNH
number needed to harm
- NNT
number needed to treat
- OR
odds ratio
- 17-OHPC
17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate
- PAMG-1
placental alpha microgobulin-1
- phIGFBP-1
phosphorylated insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-1
- PIVH
peri-/intraventricular hemorrhage
- PPROM
preterm premature rupture of membranes
- PVL
periventricular leukomalacia
- RDS
respiratory distress syndrome
- RR
relative risk
- s/p
status post
- TCO
total cervical occlusion
- TNF-α
tumor necrosis factor alpha
- Triple I
intrauterine inflammation or infection or both
II Guideline Application
Purpose and objectives
The purpose of this guideline is to improve both the outpatient and the inpatient care of patients at risk of imminent preterm birth in order to reduce the rate of preterm births. If preterm birth cannot be prevented, the aim is to reduce perinatal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. This should lead to improvements in the psychomotor and cognitive development of children born preterm.
Targeted areas of patient care
Outpatient and/or inpatient care
Target user groups/target audience
The recommendations of the guideline are aimed at gynecologists in private practice, gynecologists in hospitals, pediatricians in hospitals, midwives in private practice and midwives in hospitals. Other target user groups include advocacy groups for affected women and children, nursing staff (obstetrics/postnatal care, pediatric intensive care), medical and scientific societies and professional associations, institutions for quality assurance (e.g. IQTIG), healthcare policy institutions and decision-makers at the federal and state level, funding agencies and payers.
Adoption and period of validity
The validity of this guideline was confirmed by the executive boards of the participating medical societies, working groups, organizations and associations as well as by the executive boards of the DGGG, the SGGG and the OEGGG and by the DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG guidelines commission in February 2019 and was thus confirmed in its entirety. This guideline is valid from 1 February 2019 through to 31 January 2022. Because of the contents of this guideline, this period of validity is only an estimate. The guideline may need to be updated earlier if urgently required. If the guideline continues to mirror current knowledge, its period of validity may also be extended.
III Method
Basic principles
The method used to prepare this guideline was determined by the class to which this guideline was assigned. The AWMF Guidance Manual (version 1.0) has set out the respective rules and requirements for different classes of guidelines. Guidelines are differentiated into lowest (S1), intermediate (S2) and highest (S3) class. The lowest class is defined as a set of recommendations for action compiled by a non-representative group of experts. In 2004, the S2 class was divided into two subclasses: a systematic evidence-based subclass (S2e) and a structural consensus-based subclass (S2k). The highest S3 class combines both approaches. This guideline is classified as: S2k
Grading of recommendations
A grading of evidence and grading of recommendations is not envisaged for S2k-level guidelines. The individual Statements and Recommendations are only differentiated by syntax, not by symbols ( Table 2 ).
Table 2 Grading of recommendations.
| Level of recommendation | Syntax |
|---|---|
| Strong recommendation, highly binding | must/must not |
| Simple recommendation, moderately binding | should/should not |
| Open recommendation, not binding | may/may not |
In addition to the level of evidence, the above listed classification of “Recommendations” also takes account of the clinical relevance of the underlying studies and measures/factors which were not included in the grading of evidence, such as the choice of patient cohort, intention-to-treat or per-protocol outcome analyses, medical and ethical practice in dealing with patients, country-specific applicability, etc.
Statements
Scientific statements given in this guideline which do not consist of any direct recommendations for action but are simple statements of fact are referred to as “Statements”. It is not possible to provide any information about the grading of evidence for these Statements.
Achieving consensus und strength of consensus
As part of the structured process to achieve consensus (S2k/S3 level), authorized participants attending the session vote on draft Statements and Recommendations. This can lead to significant changes in the wording, etc. Finally, the extent of consensus is determined based on the number of participants ( Table 3 ).
Table 3 Grading of strength of consenus.
| Symbol | Strength of consensus | Extent of agreement in percent |
|---|---|---|
| +++ | Strong consensus | > 95% of participants agree |
| ++ | Consensus | > 75 – 95% of participants agree |
| + | Majority agreement | > 50 – 75% of participants agree |
| – | No consensus | < 51% of participants agree |
Expert consensus
As the name already implies, this term refers to consensus decisions taken with regard to specific Recommendations/Statements made without a prior systematic search of the literature (S2k) or for which evidence is lacking (S2e/S3). The term “expert consensus” (EC) used here is synonymous with terms used in other guidelines such as “good clinical practice” (GCP) or “clinical consensus point” (CCP). The strength of the recommendation is graded as previously described in the chapter “Grading of recommendations”, i.e., purely semantically (“must”/“must not” or “should”/“should not” or “may”/“may not”) without the use of symbols.
Addendum by the SGGG
To 1. Definition and epidemiology (and a number of other chapters: 6.9.1., 6.9.6., 6.9.7., 8.8., 8.9.)
As regards care at the limits of viability, please refer to the Recommendations for Switzerland which were developed together with neonatologists. Reasoning: The Recommendations for Switzerland diverge in many points from the Recommendations for Germany. They are currently being revised 1 .
To 3.2.3 Indications for measuring cervical length
In individual cases, an examination can also be carried out in asymptomatic women. This is described in the chapter “Asymptomatic patients” below as follows: “Measurement of cervical length using transvaginal sonography may be carried out in asymptomatic pregnant women with no risk factors for spontaneous preterm birth.” Reasoning: Emphasizing this circumstance is important in Switzerland, because in many places in Switzerland, transvaginal sonographic measurement is done as part of standard second trimester screening.
IV Guideline
1 Definition
| Consensus-based Statement 1.S1 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Preterm birth is defined as delivery prior to GW 37 + 0. It has a significant effect on perinatal morbidity and mortality. | |
Preterm birth is defined as a birth which occurs before the end of the 37th week of gestation. The consensus about what constitutes the limit of viability varies according to country and culture. For Germany, please refer to the German-language guideline “Frühgeborene an der Grenze der Lebensfähigkeit 024-019” [Preterm infants at the limits of viability]. Preterm birth has a significant effect on perinatal morbidity and mortality. Every year, approximately 965 000 preterm infants die worldwide in the neonatal period, and a further 125 000 children die in the first 5 years of life from the effects of preterm birth. Preterm birth is one of the main risk factors for disability-adjusted life years (lost years due to illness, disability or early death) 2 .
| Consensus-based Statement 1.S2 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| In 2017, the rate of preterm births in Germany was 8.36%. This means that Germany ranks quite low compared to other European countries. | |
The preterm birth rate for infants born before 37 weeks is more than 8% and has remained approximately the same in Germany since 2008 3 . This means that Germany ranks quite low compared to other European countries 4 . The rate of preterm births occurring before the 37th week of gestation was 7.9% in Austria in 2016 5 and 7.0% in Switzerland in 2017 6 . The highest rate of preterm births in Europe is reported for Cyprus where it stands at 10.4%; the lowest rate of preterm births is in Iceland with a rate of 5.3% 4 .
The reasons for these differences are ultimately still not clear. As already mentioned, the lower limit of viability for extremely preterm infants is defined and recorded very differently in different countries. It is possible that different standards of medical care also play a role. In Portugal, for example, a structural reform carried out in 1989 during which all departments with fewer than 1500 births were closed down led to a significant decrease in the mortality of preterm infants. However, the rate of preterm births increased in subsequent years. It cannot be excluded that the improvement in healthcare led to the survival of more children, who were then recorded in the register of preterm births and who would otherwise not have been recorded in that way 4 .
2 Etiology
| Consensus-based Statement 2.S3 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Around two thirds of all preterm births occur due to premature labor with or without premature rupture of membranes (spontaneous preterm births). | |
| Consensus-based Statement 2.S4 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| The etiology of preterm birth is multifactorial. Different pathophysiological mechanisms activate a common pathway which manifests clinically as premature labor and cervical dilation. | |
| Consensus-based Statement 2.S5 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 7 | |
| Preterm birth may be associated with bacterial inflammation, decidual bleeding, vascular disease, decidual senescence, impaired maternofetal immune tolerance, “functional” progesterone withdrawal or overstretching of the myometrium. | |
3 Prediction
3.1 Risk factors ( Table 4 )
Table 4 Risk factors for preterm birth.
| Risk factor | OR | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| 3 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 | ||
| s/p spontaneous preterm birth | 3.6 | 3.2 – 4.0 |
| s/p medically indicated preterm birth | 1.6 | 1.3 – 2.1 |
| s/p conization | 1.7 | 1.24 – 2.35 |
| Interval between pregnancies is < 12 months | 4.2 | 3.0 – 6.0 |
| Pregnant woman is younger < 18 years | 1.7 | 1.02 – 3.08 |
| Poor socioeconomic living conditions | 1.75 | 1.65 – 1.86 |
| Single mother | 1.61 | 1.26 – 2.07 |
| Bacterial vaginosis | 1.4 | 1.1 – 1.8 |
| Asymptomatic bacteriuria | 1.5 | 1.2 – 1.9 |
| Vaginal bleeding in early pregnancy | 2.0 | 1.7 – 2.3 |
| Vaginal bleeding in late pregnancy | 5.9 | 5.1 – 6.9 |
| Twin pregnancy | ca. 6 | |
| Smoking | 1.7 | 1.3 – 2.2 |
| Periodontitis | 2.0 | 1.2 – 3.2 |
| Anemia | 1.5 | 1.1 – 2.2 |
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E1 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Potential risk factors must be determined prior to conception or at the start of prenatal care at the latest. The particular focus must be on risk factors which can be controlled. The intervals between examinations must be adjusted to take account of the individual risk of preterm birth to implement preventive strategies. | |
3.2 Cervical length
3.2.1 Measurement technique
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E2 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| When using transvaginal sonography to measure cervical length to predict preterm birth, the measurement technique must be precisely adhered to. | |
The approach used to standardize the measurement technique as far as possible has been described previously in detail by Kagan and Sonek 14 .
3.2.2 Normal and shortened uterine cervix
| Consensus-based Statement 3.S6 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 15 | |
| In singleton pregnancies, the median cervical length prior to the 22nd week of gestation (GW) as measured by transvaginal sonography is > 40 mm; between GW 22 and 32 it is 40 mm, and after GW 32 it is approximately 35 mm. | |
| Consensus-based Statement 3.S7 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 16 | |
| A cervical length of ≤ 25 mm as measured by transvaginal sonography before GW 34 + 0 is considered to be shortened. | |
3.2.3 Indications for measuring cervical length
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E3 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| A general screening with transvaginal sonography to investigate for shortened cervical length should not be carried out in asymptomatic pregnant women with no risk factors for spontaneous preterm birth. | |
According to a single large cohort study, universal screening of singleton pregnancies in women without a previous history of preterm birth is associated with a small but significant decrease in the rates of preterm births before 37 weeks, before 34 weeks and before 32 weeks (preterm birth < GW 37: 6.7 vs. 6.0%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.82 [95% CI: 0.76 – 0.88]; preterm birth < GW 34: 1.9 vs. 1.7%; AOR 0.74 [95% CI: 0.64 – 0.85]; preterm birth < GW 32: 1.1 vs. 1.0%; AOR 0.74 [95% CI: 0.62 – 0.90]) 17 . Whether this study will result in any changes to the Cochrane review done in 2013 which concluded that routine screening to determine cervical length in all (asymptomatic and even symptomatic) pregnant women should not be recommended because knowledge of the cervical length only resulted in a non-significant reduction in the rate of preterm births before 37 weeks 18 remains to be seen, but it is highly unlikely. The fact is that there are no data available which can confirm the impact of measuring cervical length on the parameters considered in the perinatology literature to have a significant impact on perinatal mortality. At all events, insofar as there were any data available, the Cochrane review of 2013 was unable to find any differences with respect to the parameters ‘perinatal mortality’, ‘preterm birth before the 34th or 28th week of gestation’, ‘birth weight < 2500 g’, ‘maternal hospitalization’, ‘tocolytics’, ‘antenatal steroid administration’ 18 .
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E4 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Measurement of cervical length using transvaginal sonography should be included in the therapeutic concept of symptomatic pregnant women (regular spontaneous premature contractions) and/or in pregnant women with risk factors for spontaneous preterm birth. | |
Asymptomatic patients
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E5 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus ++ |
| Measurement of cervical length using transvaginal sonography may be carried out in asymptomatic pregnant women with no risk factors for spontaneous preterm birth. | |
Symptomatic patients
3.3 Biomarkers
| Consensus-based Statement 3.S9 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 34 | |
| None of the currently available biomarkers are suitable to predict the risk of preterm birth in asymptomatic pregnant women with no cervical shortening as determined by the measurement of cervical length using transvaginal ultrasonography. | |
| Consensus-based Statement 3.S10 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| * negative predictive value 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 | |
| In addition to using vaginal sonography to measure cervical length, the negative predictive value* of biomarkers obtained from cervico-vaginal secretions may be used in symptomatic pregnant women with a cervical length of between 15 and 30 mm to evaluate the risk of preterm birth occurring in the next 7 days. | |
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E9 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 41 | |
| Biomarkers should not be used to evaluate the risk of preterm birth in asymptomatic pregnant women with risk factors for preterm birth. | |
| Consensus-based Recommendation 3.E10 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 42 | |
| Biomarkers must not be used to evaluate the risk of preterm birth in asymptomatic pregnant women with no risk factors for preterm birth. | |
4 Primary Prevention
4.1 Progesterone
Dosage: 17-OHPC (17 α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate) with a weekly dose of 250 mg 43 . In the studies, progesterone was administered either orally (200 – 400 mg daily) or vaginally (90 mg gel, 100 – 200 mg capsule daily) 44 , 45 , 48 , 49 , 50 .
4.2 Cerclage/total cervical occlusion
| Consensus-based Recommendation 4.E12 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Primary (prophylactic) cerclage may be considered for women with a singleton pregnancy and a history of previous spontaneous preterm birth or late miscarriage(s). The procedure should be carried out from early in the 2nd trimester of pregnancy. | |
There is no longer any doubt that secondary cerclage in women who are s/p preterm birth and have a shortened cervical length of ≤ 25 mm before GW 24 + 0 is beneficial. When counseling patients who are s/p preterm birth, patients often also ask whether early placement of cerclage before the start of cervical shortening could be effective. No disadvantages have been reported for this approach compared to secondary cerclage in terms of either the prevalence of preterm birth or perinatal mortality 51 . However, a wait-and-see approach can reduce the number of surgical procedures by 58%.
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S11 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| There is some evidence that total cervical occlusion (TCO) may reduce the rate of preterm births in women with a singleton pregnancy and a history of previous spontaneous preterm birth or late miscarriage(s). The procedure should be carried out early in the 2nd trimester of pregnancy. | |
An article published in 1996 discussed outcomes after TCO as reported by 11 German hospitals 52 . These retrospective studies found a significant prolongation of pregnancy after TCO for women who were s/p preterm birth. To date, there are no randomized, prospective studies which confirm the benefit of TCO in women with cervical shortening and a cervical length of less than 15 mm. The surgical technique used for TCO differs quite considerably in the various international centers, making it difficult to compare outcomes.
4.3 Bacterial vaginosis
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S12 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| A vaginal flora with normal pH values and dominated by Lactobacillus species has a protective effect on the course of pregnancy in terms of preterm birth or late miscarriage. | |
| Consensus-based Recommendation 4.E13 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Pregnant women with symptomatic bacterial vaginosis should be treated with antibiotics to deal with their symptoms. | |
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S13 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus ++ |
| A diagnostic workup (which includes investigation of surrogate parameters such as vaginal pH values) to detect asymptomatic and symptomatic bacterial vaginosis followed by treatment of bacterial vaginosis does not generally reduce the rate of preterm births. | |
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S14 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| There is some evidence that the diagnosis and treatment of asymptomatic and symptomatic bacterial vaginosis prior to GW 23 + 0 GW reduces the rate of preterm births which occur before GW 37 + 0. | |
Numerous meta-analyses of case control and cohort studies have proven that there is an association between infections of the genital tract and the occurrence of preterm births 53 , 54 . However, there is still no clear evidence that treatment of an infection, particularly if it is still subclinical, reduces the preterm birth rate 53 , 55 . To date, there is only a single study 56 in which pregnant women were screened by Gram stain for bacterial vaginosis at the beginning of their 2nd trimester of pregnancy. The women were randomized into an intervention group and a control group, with the test results either communicated to the womanʼs clinician (in the intervention group) or not revealed. The women in the intervention group were subsequently treated (with clindamycin if the test results revealed bacterial vaginosis). In the intervention arm of the study, the preterm birth rate before 37 weeks was 3.0% compared to 5.3% in the control arm; the difference between the two groups was thus significantly different. This study is currently the only one which was included in the Cochrane review of this highly relevant topic, and its findings therefore affect the outcome of the review. The revision of the review published in 2015 57 states: “There is evidence from one trial that infection screening and treatment programs for pregnant women before 20 weeksʼ gestation reduce preterm birth and preterm low birthweight.”
The results of the PREMEVA trial were recently published 58 . More than 84 000 pregnant women were screened for bacterial vaginosis before the end of their 14th week of gestation. Bacterial vaginosis, defined as a Nugent Score of 7 – 10, was detected in 5360 pregnant women. Pregnant women with bacterial vaginosis but a low risk of preterm birth were then randomized 2 : 1 into 3 groups as follows: single course (n = 943) or three courses (n = 968) of 300 mg clindamycin administered 2 × daily for 4 days or placebo (n = 958). Women with a high risk of preterm birth were randomized separately 1 : 1 into 2 groups: single course (n = 122) or three courses (n = 114) of 300 mg clindamycin 2 × daily. The primary outcome was late miscarriage, defined as occurring between the 16th and the 21st week of gestation, or very early preterm birth, defined occurring as between the 22nd and the 32nd week of gestation.
In the group of 2869 pregnant women with a low risk of preterm birth, 22 women (1.2%) in the clindamycin group and 10 women (1.0%) in the placebo group had a late miscarriage or a very early preterm birth (RR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.53 – 2.32; p = 0.82). In the group of 236 pregnant with a high risk of preterm birth, 5 women (4.4%) in the group treated with 3 courses of clindamycin and 8 women (6.0%) in the group treated with one course of clindamycin had a late miscarriage or a very early preterm birth (RR 0.67, 95% CI: 0.23 – 2.00; p = 0.47). Side effects were noted significantly more often in the group of pregnant women with a low risk of preterm birth in the clindamycin groups compared to the placebo group (58/1904 [3.0%] compared to 12/956 [1.3%]; p = 0.0035). The most common side effects were diarrhea and abdominal pain.
The authors concluded from their results that screening for bacterial vaginosis and treatment with clindamycin, when required, does not reduce the risk of late miscarriage or very early preterm birth in patients with a low risk of preterm birth.
4.4 Prevention programs
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S15 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 59 | |
| The efficacy of multimodal prevention programs and risk scoring systems has not been sufficiently proven. | |
4.5 Cessation of smoking
4.6 Asymptomatic bacteriuria
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S17 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Asymptomatic bacteriuria is a significant risk factor for preterm birth. Because of the lack of data, screening for the sole purpose of reducing the preterm birth rate is not currently recommended. | |
| Consensus-based Recommendation 4.E14 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Because of the lack of data, it is not possible to issue a recommendation that antibiotic treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria reduces the rate of preterm births. | |
In its final report on screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria published in 2015, the IQWIG came to the following conclusion 62 : The patient-relevant medical benefit or harm of screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnant women is not clear due to a lack of studies. There is no evidence that antibiotic treatment of pregnant women for asymptomatic bacteriuria has any patient-relevant medical benefit or harm, as the existing data is unsuitable with regard to the current standard of care for pregnant women.
4.7 Supplementation with omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids
| Consensus-based Statement 4.S18 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| The data from studies on reducing preterm birth rates through dietary supplementation with omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (omega-3 PUFA) is inconsistent. Supplementation with omega-3 PUFA may be considered for women with a history of spontaneous preterm birth. | |
A Cochrane Review carried out in 2006 showed that pregnant women whose diet included higher levels of marine oil had a mean gestation that was 2.6 days longer compared to pregnant women without marine oil supplementation and women given placebo, and that women with marine oil supplementation had a significantly lower risk of preterm birth before 34 + 0 weeks of gestation (RR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49 – 0.99) 63 . These findings were confirmed in a recently published update 64 .
5 Secondary Prevention
5.1 Progesterone
| Consensus-based Recommendation 5.E15 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Women with a singleton pregnancy and a sonographically measured cervical length before 24 + 0 weeks of ≤ 25 mm must be treated with daily intravaginal administration of progesterone up until 36 + 6 weeks of gestation (200 mg capsule/day or 90 mg gel/day). | |
An individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) carried out in 2018, which included data from the OPPTIMUM trial 44 , found that intravaginal administration of progesterone resulted in a significant reduction in the rate of preterm births and improved neonatal outcomes for pregnant women with asymptomatic cervical shortening (≤ 25 mm) before 24 + 0 weeks of gestation 65 .
5.2 Cerclage
| Consensus-based Recommendation 5.E16 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| Women with a singleton pregnancy following a previous spontaneous preterm birth or late miscarriage and whose sonographically measured cervical length before 24 + 0 weeks of gestation is ≤ 25 mm, should be treated with cerclage. | |
A meta-analysis of the 5 prospective randomized studies on this topic showed that the preterm birth rate of patients who had had a previous preterm birth and had an incompetent cervix measuring less than 25 mm before 24 weeks of gestation was significantly reduced by the placement of a cerclage. Moreover – and this is particularly clinically relevant – placement of the cerclage also significantly reduced perinatal mortality and morbidity 66 .
5.3 Cervical pessary
| Consensus-based Recommendation 5.E17 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus ++ |
| Women with a singleton pregnancy whose sonographically measured cervical length before 24 + 0 weeks of gestation is ≤ 25 mm may benefit from placement of a cervical pessary. | |
A number of prospective randomized studies have been carried out to evaluate the benefit of cervical pessary placement in women with singleton pregnancies whose cervical length before 24 + 0 weeks of gestation was less than 25 mm as measured by transvaginal sonography. The results of these prospective studies have differed considerably. Some studies reported a significant reduction in the rate of preterm births following placement of a cervical pessary 67 , 68 , 69 , other studies did not 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 . Cervical pessary placement is a procedure with an extremely low rate of complications. Increased vaginal discharge following the procedure is quite common, but this has no pathological significance. In view of the above, placement of a cervical pessary may be considered in individual cases for women with singleton pregnancies whose cervical length before 24 + 0 weeks of gestation is ≤ 25 mm.
5.4 Workload and physical activity
| Consensus-based Statement 5.S19 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| 74 | |
| Prolonged working hours, shift work, standing every day for more than 6 hours, heavy lifting and heavy physical labor done by working pregnant women are associated with little, if any, significant adverse effects on preterm birth. Employers must evaluate the individual risk for the pregnant woman according to the respective situation and must consider whether the activities she carries out as part of her workload constitute an unjustifiable risk. An additional individual medical consultation which takes account of other risk factors and obstetric complications would be useful. | |
| Consensus-based Statement 5.S20 | |
|---|---|
| Expert consensus | Strength of consensus +++ |
| The data on whether pregnant women at risk for preterm birth and pregnant women not at risk for preterm birth should avoid strenuous physical activities at home is insufficient to draw reliable conclusions. | |
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest/Interessenkonflikt The conflict of interest statements of all the authors are available in the long version of the guideline./Die Interessenkonflikterklärungen aller Autoren finden Sie in der Langversion der Leitlinie.
Guideline Program. Editors.
Leading Professional Medical Associations
German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe e. V. [DGGG])
Head Office of DGGG and Professional Societies Hausvogteiplatz 12, DE-10117 Berlin info@dggg.de http://www.dggg.de/
President of DGGG
Prof. Dr. med. Anton Scharl Direktor der Frauenkliniken Klinikum St. Marien Amberg Mariahilfbergweg 7, DE-92224 Amberg Kliniken Nordoberpfalz AG Söllnerstraße 16, DE-92637 Weiden
DGGG Guidelines Representatives
Prof. Dr. med. Matthias W. Beckmann Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Frauenklinik Universitätsstraße 21 – 23, DE-91054 Erlangen
Prof. Dr. med. Erich-Franz Solomayer Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes Geburtshilfe und Reproduktionsmedizin Kirrberger Straße, Gebäude 9, DE-66421 Homburg
Guidelines Coordination
Dr. med. Paul Gaß, Dr. med. Gregor Olmes, Christina Meixner Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Frauenklinik Universitätsstraße 21 – 23, DE-91054 Erlangen fk-dggg-leitlinien@uk-erlangen.de http://www.dggg.de/leitlinienstellungnahmen
Austrian Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Österreichische Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe [OEGGG]) Frankgasse 8, AT-1090 Wien stephanie.leutgeb@oeggg.at http://www.oeggg.at
President of OEGGG
Prof. Dr. med. Petra Kohlberger Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde Wien Währinger Gürtel 18–20, AT-1090 Wien
OEGGG Guidelines Representatives
Prof. Dr. med. Karl Tamussino Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe Graz Auenbruggerplatz 14, AT-8036 Graz
Prof. Dr. med. Hanns Helmer Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde Wien Währinger Gürtel 18–20, AT-1090 Wien
Swiss Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics (Schweizerische Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe [SGGG])
Gynécologie Suisse SGGG Altenbergstraße 29, Postfach 6, CH-3000 Bern 8 sekretariat@sggg.ch http://www.sggg.ch/
President in SGGG
Dr. med. Irène Dingeldein Längmatt 32, CH-3280 Murten
SGGG Guidelines Representatives
Prof. Dr. med. Daniel Surbek Universitätsklinik für Frauenheilkunde Geburtshilfe und feto-maternale Medizin Inselspital Bern Effingerstraße 102, CH-3010 Bern
Prof. Dr. med. René Hornung Kantonsspital St. Gallen, Frauenklinik Rorschacher Straße 95, CH-9007 St. Gallen
References/Literatur
- 1.Swiss-Paediatrics Perinatale Betreuung an der Grenze der Lebensfähigkeit zwischen 22 und 26 vollendeten SchwangerschaftswochenOnline:http://www.swiss-paediatrics.org/sites/default/files/paediatrica/vol23/n1/pdf/10-12_0.pdflast access: 28.04.2019
- 2.Murray C J, Vos T, Lozano R. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380:2197–2223. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61689-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.IQTIG Bundesauswertung zum Erfassungsjahr 2017 – Geburtshilfe QualitätsindikatorenOnline:https://iqtig.org/downloads/auswertung/2017/16n1gebh/QSKH_16n1-GEBH_2017_BUAW_V02_2018-08-01.pdflast access: 28.04.2019
- 4.Zeitlin J, Mohangoo A, Delnord M.The European Health Report 2010Online:http://www.europeristat.com/reports/european-perinatal-health-report-2010.htmllast access: 28.04.2019
- 5.Institut für klinische Epidemiologie der Tirol Kliniken GmbH Bericht Geburtenregister Östereich, Geburtsjahr 2016Online:https://www.iet.at/data.cfm?vpath=publikationen210/groe/groe-jahresbericht-2016last access: 28.04.2019
- 6.Bundesamt für Statistik Gesundheit der NeugeborenenOnline:https://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/de/home/statistiken/gesundheit/gesundheitszustand/gesundheit-neugeborenen.htmllast access: 28.04.2019
- 7.Romero R, Dey S K, Fisher S J. Preterm labor: one syndrome, many causes. Science. 2014;345:760–765. doi: 10.1126/science.1251816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Hillier S L, Nugent R P, Eschenbach D A. Association between bacterial vaginosis and preterm delivery of a low-birth-weight infant. The Vaginal Infections and Prematurity Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1995;333:1737–1742. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199512283332604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Meis P J, Michielutte R, Peters T J. Factors associated with preterm birth in Cardiff, Wales. II. Indicated and spontaneous preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173:597–602. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90288-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Murphy D J. Epidemiology and environmental factors in preterm labour. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;21:773–789. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2007.03.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Yi S W, Han Y J, Ohrr H. Anemia before pregnancy and risk of preterm birth, low birth weight and small-for-gestational-age birth in Korean women. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013;67:337–342. doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2013.12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Schummers L, Hutcheon J A, Hernandez-Diaz S. Association of Short Interpregnancy Interval With Pregnancy Outcomes According to Maternal Age. JAMA Intern Med. 2018;178:1661–1670. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4696. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Wetzka S, Gallwas J, Hasbargen U. Einfluss von Konisation auf die Frühgeburtenrate und das perinatale Outcome: Eine retrospektive Analyse der Daten zur externen stationären Qualitätssicherung für die Erfassungsjahre 2009–2014. Geburtsh Frauenheilk. 2018 doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1671476. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Kagan K O, Sonek J. How to measure cervical length. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45:358–362. doi: 10.1002/uog.14742. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Salomon L J, Diaz-Garcia C, Bernard J P. Reference range for cervical length throughout pregnancy: non-parametric LMS-based model applied to a large sample. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009;33:459–464. doi: 10.1002/uog.6332. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Iams J D, Goldenberg R L, Meis P J. The length of the cervix and the risk of spontaneous premature delivery. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal Fetal Medicine Unit Network. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:567–572. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199602293340904. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Son M, Grobman W A, Ayala N K. A universal mid-trimester transvaginal cervical length screening program and its associated reduced preterm birth rate. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:3650–3.65E7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.12.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Berghella V, Baxter J K, Hendrix N W. Cervical assessment by ultrasound for preventing preterm delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(01):CD007235. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007235.pub3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Berghella V, Talucci M, Desai A. Does transvaginal sonographic measurement of cervical length before 14 weeks predict preterm delivery in high-risk pregnancies? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;21:140–144. doi: 10.1002/uog.28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Owen J, Yost N, Berghella V. Can shortened midtrimester cervical length predict very early spontaneous preterm birth? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:298–303. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2003.11.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Fox N S, Jean-Pierre C, Predanic M. Short cervix: is a follow-up measurement useful? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;29:44–46. doi: 10.1002/uog.3902. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Dilek T U, Yazici G, Gurbuz A. Progressive cervical length changes versus single cervical length measurement by transvaginal ultrasound for prediction of preterm delivery. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2007;64:175–179. doi: 10.1159/000106486. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Crane J M, Hutchens D. Follow-up cervical length in asymptomatic high-risk women and the risk of spontaneous preterm birth. J Perinatol. 2011;31:318–323. doi: 10.1038/jp.2010.149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Owen J, Yost N, Berghella V. Mid-trimester endovaginal sonography in women at high risk for spontaneous preterm birth. JAMA. 2001;286:1340–1348. doi: 10.1001/jama.286.11.1340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Owen J, Hankins G, Iams J D. Multicenter randomized trial of cerclage for preterm birth prevention in high-risk women with shortened midtrimester cervical length. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201:3750–3.75E10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.08.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R, Hassan S S. Transvaginal sonographic cervical length for the prediction of spontaneous preterm birth in twin pregnancies: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203:1280–1.28E14. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.02.064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Lim A C, Hegeman M A, Huis In ʼT Veld M A. Cervical length measurement for the prediction of preterm birth in multiple pregnancies: a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38:10–17. doi: 10.1002/uog.9013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Romero R, Conde-Agudelo A, El-Refaie W. Vaginal progesterone decreases preterm birth and neonatal morbidity and mortality in women with a twin gestation and a short cervix: an updated meta-analysis of individual patient data. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:303–314. doi: 10.1002/uog.17397. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.van ʼt Hooft J, van der Lee J H, Opmeer B C. Pessary for prevention of preterm birth in twin pregnancy with short cervix: 3-year follow-up study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51:621–628. doi: 10.1002/uog.19029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Berghella V, Palacio M, Ness A. Cervical length screening for prevention of preterm birth in singleton pregnancy with threatened preterm labor: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using individual patient-level data. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49:322–329. doi: 10.1002/uog.17388. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Ness A, Visintine J, Ricci E. Does knowledge of cervical length and fetal fibronectin affect management of women with threatened preterm labor? A randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:4260–4.26E9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.07.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Palacio M, Sánchez M, Cobo T. Cervical length measurement to reduce length of stay in patients admitted because of pretermlabor. Prospective and randomized trial. Final results. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28:485. [Google Scholar]
- 33.Alfirevic Z, Allen-Coward H, Molina F. Targeted therapy for threatened preterm labor based on sonographic measurement of the cervical length: a randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;29:47–50. doi: 10.1002/uog.3908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Conde-Agudelo A, Papageorghiou A T, Kennedy S H. Novel biomarkers for the prediction of the spontaneous preterm birth phenotype: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2011;118:1042–1054. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02923.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Melchor J C, Khalil A, Wing D. Prediction of preterm delivery in symptomatic women using PAMG-1, fetal fibronectin and phIGFBP-1 tests: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52:442–451. doi: 10.1002/uog.19119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Deshpande S N, van Asselt A D, Tomini F. Rapid fetal fibronectin testing to predict preterm birth in women with symptoms of premature labour: a systematic review and cost analysis. Health Technol Assess. 2013;17:1–138. doi: 10.3310/hta17400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Abbott D S, Radford S K, Seed P T. Evaluation of a quantitative fetal fibronectin test for spontaneous preterm birth in symptomatic women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;208:1220–1.22E8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.10.890. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Kuhrt K, Unwin C, Hezelgrave N. Endocervical and high vaginal quantitative fetal fibronectin in predicting preterm birth. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:1576–1579. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.870550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Kuhrt K, Hezelgrave N, Foster C. Development and validation of a tool incorporating quantitative fetal fibronectin to predict spontaneous preterm birth in symptomatic women. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47:210–216. doi: 10.1002/uog.14894. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Bruijn M M, Kamphuis E I, Hoesli I M. The predictive value of quantitative fibronectin testing in combination with cervical length measurement in symptomatic women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:7930–7.93E10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.08.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Hezelgrave N L, Abbott D S, Radford S K. Quantitative Fetal Fibronectin at 18 Weeks of Gestation to Predict Preterm Birth in Asymptomatic High-Risk Women. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:255–263. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Esplin M S, Elovitz M A, Iams J D. Predictive Accuracy of Serial Transvaginal Cervical Lengths and Quantitative Vaginal Fetal Fibronectin Levels for Spontaneous Preterm Birth Among Nulliparous Women. JAMA. 2017;317:1047–1056. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.1373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Meis P J, Klebanoff M, Thom E. Prevention of recurrent preterm delivery by 17 alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2379–2385. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa035140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Norman J E, Marlow N, Messow C M. Vaginal progesterone prophylaxis for preterm birth (the OPPTIMUM study): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet. 2016;387:2106–2116. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00350-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Ashoush S, ElKady O, AlHawwary G. The value of oral micronized progesterone in the prevention of recurrent spontaneous preterm birth: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2017;96:1460–1466. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Dodd J M, Grivell R M, OBrien C M. Prenatal administration of progestogens for preventing spontaneous preterm birth in women with a multiple pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;(10):CD012024. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012024.pub2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Crowther C A, Ashwood P, McPhee A J. Vaginal progesterone pessaries for pregnant women with a previous preterm birth to prevent neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (the PROGRESS Study): A multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2017;14:e1002390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.OʼBrien J M, Adair C D, Lewis D F. Progesterone vaginal gel for the reduction of recurrent preterm birth: primary results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007;30:687–696. doi: 10.1002/uog.5158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Rai P, Rajaram S, Goel N. Oral micronized progesterone for prevention of preterm birth. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009;104:40–43. doi: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.08.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.da Fonseca E B, Bittar R E, Carvalho M HB. 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;188:419–424. doi: 10.1067/mob.2003.41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Berghella V, MacKeen A D. Cervical length screening with ultrasound-indicated cerclage compared with history-indicated cerclage for prevention of preterm birth: A meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:148–155. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31821fd5b0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Saling E, Schumacher E. Total surgical cervical occlusion. Conclusions from data of several clinica, which use total surgical cervical occlusion. Z Geburtshilfe Neonatol. 1996;200:82–87. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Leitich H, Bodner-Adler B, Brunbauer M. Bacterial vaginosis as a risk factor for preterm delivery: a meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189:139–147. doi: 10.1067/mob.2003.339. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Flynn C A, Helwig A L, Meurer L N. Bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy and the risk of prematurity: a meta-analysis. J Fam Pract. 1999;48:885–892. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Lamont R F. Advances in the Prevention of Infection-Related Preterm Birth. Front Immunol. 2015;6:566. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Kiss H, Petricevic L, Husslein P. Prospective randomised controlled trial of an infection screening programme to reduce the rate of preterm delivery. BMJ. 2004;329:371. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38169.519653.EB. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Sangkomkamhang U S, Lumbiganon P, Prasertcharoensuk W. Antenatal lower genital tract infection screening and treatment programs for preventing preterm delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(02):CD006178. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006178.pub3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Subtil D, Brabant G, Tilloy E. Early clindamycin for bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy (PREMEVA): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;392:2171–2179. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31617-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Hollowell J, Oakley L, Kurinczuk J J. The effectiveness of antenatal care programmes to reduce infant mortality and preterm birth in socially disadvantaged and vulnerable women in high-income countries: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011;11:13. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-11-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Moore E, Blatt K, Chen A. Relationship of trimester-specific smoking patterns and risk of preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;215:1.09E108. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.01.167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Polakowski L L, Akinbami L J, Mendola P. Prenatal smoking cessation and the risk of delivering preterm and small-for-gestational-age newborns. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114:318–325. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181ae9e9c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.IQWIG 2015: Abschlußbericht S13-02 Bakteriuriescreening bei SchwangerenOnline:https://www.iqwig.de/download/S13-02_Abschlussbericht_Bakteriuriescreening-bei-Schwangeren.pdflast access: 28.04.2019
- 63.Makrides M, Duley L, Olsen S F. Marine oil, and other prostaglandin precursor, supplementation for pregnancy uncomplicated by pre-eclampsia or intrauterine growth restriction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;(03):CD003402. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003402.pub2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Middleton P, Gomersall J C, Gould J F. Omega-3 fatty acid addition during pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;(11):CD003402. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003402.pub3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Romero R, Nicolaides K H, Conde-Agudelo A. Vaginal progesterone decreases preterm birth </= 34 weeks of gestation in women with a singleton pregnancy and a short cervix: an updated meta-analysis including data from the OPPTIMUM study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;48:308–317. doi: 10.1002/uog.15953. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66.Berghella V, Odibo A O, To M S. Cerclage for short cervix on ultrasonography: Meta-analysis of trials using individual patient-level data. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:181–189. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000168435.17200.53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67.Goya M, Pratcorona L, Merced C. Cervical pessary in pregnant women with a short cervix (PECEP): an open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1800–1806. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60030-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68.Saccone G, Maruotti G M, Giudicepietro A. Effect of Cervical Pessary on Spontaneous Preterm Birth in Women With Singleton Pregnancies and Short Cervical Length: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;318:2317–2324. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.18956. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69.Cruz-Melguizo S, San-Frutos L, Martinez-Payo C. Cervical Pessary Compared With Vaginal Progesterone for Preventing Early Preterm Birth: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132:907–915. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70.Hui S Y, Chor C M, Lau T K. Cerclage pessary for preventing preterm birth in women with a singleton pregnancy and a short cervix at 20 to 24 weeks: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Perinatol. 2013;30:283–288. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1322550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71.Nicolaides K H, Syngelaki A, Poon L C. A Randomized Trial of a Cervical Pessary to Prevent Preterm Singleton Birth. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1044–1052. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1511014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72.Karbasian N, Sheikh M, Pirjani R. Combined treatment with cervical pessary and vaginal progesterone for the prevention of preterm birth: A randomized clinical trial. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2016;42:1673–1679. doi: 10.1111/jog.13138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73.Dugoff L, Berghella V, Sehdev H. Prevention of preterm birth with pessary in singletons (PoPPS): randomized controlled trial. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51:573–579. doi: 10.1002/uog.18908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74.Palmer K T, Bonzini M, Bonde J P. Pregnancy: occupational aspects of management: concise guidance. Clin Med. 2013;13:75–79. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.13-1-75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]