The use of vaginal progesterone as a maintenance therapy in women with arrested preterm labor: a double-blind placebo–randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Jon Hyett ◽  
Nasrin Asadi ◽  
Maryam Zare Khafri ◽  
Homeira Vafaei ◽  
Maryam Kasraeian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Preterm Labor ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vaginal Progesterone

A Double-Blind Placebo Randomized Controlled Trial of Minocycline to Reduce Pain After Carpal Tunnel and Trigger Finger Release

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 166-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine M. Curtin ◽  
Debbie Kenney ◽  
Paola Suarez ◽  
Vincent R. Hentz ◽  
Tina Hernandez-Boussard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Trigger Finger ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals Maintenance Treatment With Vaginal Progesterone or Placebo Delayed Preterm Birth More Efficiently Than Intravenous Tocolysis Alone – A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ylva Vladic Stjernholm ◽  
Giovanna Marchini
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Preterm Birth ◽  
Preterm Labor ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Reference Group ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Pathogen Invasion ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vaginal Progesterone

Abstract Objective To evaulate the efficacy of maintenance treatment with vaginal progesterone gel compared to placebo in women after the onset of preterm labor.Material and Methods A randomized controlled trial at a university hospital in Sweden in 2009 − 18. Healthy women with singleton pregnancy and early preterm labor were randomized to daily progesterone gel 90 mg (n = 29) or placebo (n = 29) after standard intravenous tocolysis. Women with intravenous tocolysis alone (n = 29) served as a reference group. Results The latency to delivery was 58 ± 34 days with progesterone, 64 ± 51 days with placebo and 2 ± 2 days in the reference group (p < 0.0001 respectively). The rate of preterm birth < 34 weeks was 34% after progesterone, 38% after placebo and 100% in the reference group (progesterone vs reference p = 0.01 and placebo vs reference p = 0.02). The composite neonatal morbidity and length of neonatal intensive care were lower after progesterone and placebo compared to the reference group (p < 0.0001 respectively).Conclusion Maintenance treatment with vaginal progesterone gel or placebo delayed preterm birth more efficiently than intravenous tocolysis alone, suggesting an effect of the placebo gel rather than of progesterone. We conclude, that the placebo gel reinforced the physiological barrier at the uterine cervix which protects the pregnancy from pathogen invasion and uterine infection leading to preterm birth.

A randomized controlled trial of two-doses of vaginal progesterone 400 vs. 200 mg for prevention of preterm labor in twin gestations

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed S. Abdel Wahab ◽  
Mostafa I. Abdelmonaem ◽  
Walaa M. Mahmoud ◽  
Ahmed E. Mansour
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Preterm Labor ◽  
Twin Pregnancy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Transvaginal Ultrasound ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Average Weight ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vaginal Progesterone ◽  
Second Twin

Abstract Objectives To compare between the effectiveness and safety of two different daily doses of vaginal progesterone (400 vs. 200 mg) in the prevention of preterm labor in twin pregnancy. Methods This is a prospective single-blinded randomized controlled trial conducted on 100 primi-gravida who had twin pregnancy and attended the antenatal clinic of a University hospital. They were equally and randomly allocated into two arms each containing 50 patients. Arm 1 received 400 mg and arm 2 received 200 mg vaginal progesterone daily at bed time starting from 14 weeks of pregnancy to 36 weeks. Transvaginal ultrasound was performed for assessment of the length of cervix at 14 and 22 weeks. Results Both arms of the current study were comparable regarding the cervical length at 14 and 22 weeks, mean gestational age at delivery, incidence of pre-term delivery, birth weight of the first twin. Second twin in addition to the average weight of both twins. No statistical significance differences between two arms regarding incidence of early neonatal death. NICU, mechanical ventilation, length of admission in NICU for the first twin. Second twin as well as both twins. Conclusions Vaginal progesterone treatment with different doses was tolerable, but wasn’t effective in the prevention of preterm labor in twin pregnancy.

scholarly journals Efeito dos probióticos no tratamento de câncer colorretal

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne Ribeiro Rodrigues ◽  
Layla Rafaele Sampaio Learte ◽  
Dallyla Jennifer Moraes de Sousa ◽  
Larissa Layanna Cardoso de Sousa ◽  
Yasmin de Oliveira Cantuário ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Rio De Janeiro ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Infectious Complications ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Introdução: O câncer é definido como uma proliferação descontrolada de células malignas em um hospedeiro e considerado uma das principais causas de morte em todo o mundo. No Brasil, o câncer colorretal é a segunda causa de morte mais comum entre mulheres e a terceira mais prevalente em homens. Muitas estratégias têm sido estudadas para auxiliar o tratamento antineoplásico. Dentro desse contexto, a ingestão de probióticos, representa uma nova opção terapêutica relevante no âmbito da nutrição. Objetivo: Realizar uma revisão sobre o uso dos probióticos no tratamento de pacientes com câncer colorretal. Material e Método: Trata-se de uma revisão realizada em 2018,   utilizando-se 10 artigos, pesquisados nas bases indexadas BVS e PubMed e na ferramenta de pesquisa Google acadêmico. A pesquisa incluiu artigos em português e inglês publicados no período de 2010 a 2017. Resultados: O uso de probióticos demonstrou trazer efeitos positivos ao tratamento de pacientes com câncer colorretal, trazendo benefícios como: a diminuição de enterobactérias e enterococos, melhora na modulação da imunidade local, melhora dos sintomas intestinais, recuperação da função intestinal, entre outros. Conclusão: Conclui-se que apesar dos resultados positivos observados, há a necessidade de futuros estudos de longa duração para elucidar melhor essa relação.Descritores: Neoplasias Colorretais; Nutrientes; Probióticos.ReferênciasKahouli I, Malhotra M, Westfall S, Alaoui-Jamali MA, Prakash S. Design and validation of an orally administrated active L. fermentum-L. acidophilus probiotic formulation using colorectal cancer Apc Min/+ mouse model. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2017;101(5):1999-2019.Oliveira RC, Rêgo MAV. Mortality risck of colorectal câncer in Brazil from 1980 to 2013. Arq Gastroenterol 2016;53(2)76-83.Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA). Tipos de câncer: colorretal. Rio de Janeiro: INCA; 2018.Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA). Estimativa 2016: incidência de Câncer no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: INCA; 2016.Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Departamento de Informática do SUS (DATASUS). Painel de Monitoramento da Mortalidade CID-10. Brasília; 2017.Corrêa RS, Pinto JRFE, Santos LV, Góis MC, Silva RP, Silva HM. Rectal cancer survival in a Brazilian Cancer Reference Unit. J Coloproctol. 2016;36:203-7.Oliveira AL, Aarestrupo FM. Avaliação nutricional e atividade inflamatória sistêmica de pacientes submetidos à suplementação com simbióticos. ABCD arq bras cir dig. 2012;25(3):147-53.Jacoby JT, Guzzon S, Rosech LFW, Mendes RH. Uso de pré, pró e simbióticos como coadjuvantes no tratamento do câncer colorretal. Clin Biomed Res. 2017;37(3):232-46.Gao Z, Guo B, Gao R, Zhu Q, Wu W, Qin H. Probiotics modify human intestinal mucosa-associated microbiota in patients with colorectal cancer. Mol Med Rep. 2015;12(4):6119-27.Chaves PL, Gorini MI. Qualidade de vida do paciente com câncer colorretal em quimioterapia ambulatorial. Rev Gaucha Enferm. 2011;32(4):767-73.Barbosa, LRLS. Perfil nutricional de pacientes em pré-operatório eletivo para câncer colorretal [dissertação]. Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; 2011.Denipote FG, Trindade EBSM, Burini RC. Probióticos e Prebióticos na atenção primária ao câncer de cólon. Arq Gastroenterol. 2010;47(1):93-8.Machado FF, Lazzaretti RK, Poziomyck AK. Uso de prebióticos, probióticos e simbióticos nos pré e pós- operatórios do câncer colorretal: uma revisão. Rev bras cancerol. 2014;60(4):363-70.Correia MITD, Liboredo JC, Consoli MLD. The role of probiotics in gastrointestinal surgery. Nutrition. 2012;28(3):230-34.Zhang JW, Du P, Gao J, Yang BR, Fang WJ, Ying CM. Preoperative probiotics decrease postoperative infectious complications of colorectal cancer. Am J Med Sci. 2012;343(3):199-205.Liu Z, Qin H, Yang Z, Xia Y, Liu W, Yang J et al. Randomised clinical trial: the effects of perioperative probiotic treatment on barrier function and postoperative infectious complications in colorectal câncer surgery – a double-blind study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2011;33(1):50-63.Yang Y, Xia Y, Chen H, Hong L, Feng J, Yang J et al. The effect of perioperative probiotics treatment for colorectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. Oncotarget. 7(7);8432-40.Kotzampassi K, Stavrou G, Damoraki G, Georgitsi M, Basdanis G, Tsaousi G et al. A four-Probiotics regimen reduces postoperative complications after colorectal surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. World J Surg. 2015;39(11):2776-83.Lee JY, Chu SH, Jeon JY, Lee MK, Park JH, Lee DC et al. Effects of 12 weeks of probiotic supplementation on quality of life in colorectal cancer survivors: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Dig Liver Dis. 2014;46(12):1126-32.Gianotti L, Morelli L, Galbiati F, Rocchetti S, Coppola S, Beneduce A. A randomized double-blind trial on perioperative administration of probiotics in colorectal cancer patients. World J Gastroenterol. 2010;16(2):167-75.Stephens JH, Hewett PJ. Clinical trial assessing VSL#3 for the treatment of anterior resection syndrome. ANZ J Surg. 2012;82(6):420-27.Xia Y, Yang Z, Chen HQ, Qin HL. Effect of bowel preparation with probiotics on intestinal barrier after surgery for colorectal cancer. Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2010;13:528-31.Zhu D, Chen X, Wu J, Ju Y, Feng J, Lu G, et al. Effect of perioperative intestinal probiotics on intestinal flora and immune function in patients with colorectal cancer. Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao. 2012;32(8):1190-93.Derrien M, Van Hilckama Vlieg JE. Fate, activity, and impact of ingested bacteria within the human gut microbiota. Trends Microbiol. 2015;23(6):354-366.Gaudier E, Michel C, Segain JP, Cherbut C, Hoebler C. The VSL#3 probiotic mixture modifies microflora but does not heal chronic dextran-sodium sulfateinduced colitis or reinforce the mucus barrier in mice. J Nutr. 2005;135(12):2753-61.Mego M, Chovanec J, Vochyanova-Andrezalova I, Konkolovsky P, Mikulova M, Reckova M et al. Prevention of irinotecan induced diarrhea by probiotics: a randomized double blind, placebo controlled pilot study. Complement Ther Med. 2015;23(3):356-62.Yang Y, Xia Y, Chen H, Hong L, Feng J, Yang J et al. The effect of perioperative probiotics treatment for colorectal cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomized controlled trial. Oncotarget. 2016;7(7):8432-40.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document