Postpartum HemorrhagePhase 2NCT00107874
Oral Misoprostol Versus Intravenous Oxytocin in Preventing Blood Loss After Non-scheduled Cesarean Section
A Phase 2 study testing misoprostol in people with Postpartum Hemorrhage, run by University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) ranks among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality, both in developed and developing countries. With this trial, we sought to determine the effectiveness of oral misoprostol as an uterotonic drug in comparison with intravenous oxytocin, in patients with a low risk of PPH… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Postpartum Hemorrhage
- What is being tested?
- misoprostol
- How many people
- 56 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- Jan 1999to Feb 2002
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Non-scheduled primary or secondary Cesarean section (CS) after the 37th week of gestation
Who cannot join
- Emergency CS
- Fetal distress
- Fetal malformations
- Preeclampsia and HELLP (Hemolysis-Elevated Liver enzymes-Low Platelet count syndrome)
- Hypersensitivity to prostaglandins
- Coagulopathy
Show all 11Show fewer
- Severe systemic disorders
- An American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status >/= 3
- Severe asthma
- Prior myomectomy
- Maternal fever (> 38.5 °C)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Oral Misoprostol as a Second-line Alternative to Intravenous Oxytocin in Preventing Postoperative Blood Loss After Non-scheduled Cesarean Section: a Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) ranks among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality, both in developed and developing countries.
With this trial, we sought to determine the effectiveness of oral misoprostol as an uterotonic drug in comparison with intravenous oxytocin, in patients with a low risk of PPH undergoing non-scheduled Cesarean section.
We therefore compared the intra- and postoperative blood loss, as well as drug related side effects in patients, treated by the same surgical and anesthesiological team in one institution.
Read the detailed description
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is still among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. The incidence of PPH is reduced by active management of the third stage of labor which includes the use of uterotonics for pharmacological prophylaxis. However, there is an on-going debate about the optimal drug selection since uterotonics such as oxytocin and methylergometrine are liable for specific side effects and complications when administered within a dose range needed to be effective for PPH. In the search for an alternative to these conventional standard uterotonics, misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) has turned out to be an effective therapeutic option and has been implemented in actual treatment regimens. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of oral applicated misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin in reducing blood loss in low risk obstetric patients undergoing non-scheduled cesarean section (CS) under spinal anesthesia.
Comparison:
In this prospective, double blind study, parturients undergoing CS were randomized to receive either a) oral misoprostol and an infusion of normal saline supplemented with placebo, or b) an oral placebo and an infusion of normal saline, supplemented with oxytocin subsequently to intravenous oxytocin after cord clamping in both groups.
The primary outcomes were the amount of intra- and postoperative blood loss and the occurrence of drug-related side effects.
- Conditions
- Postpartum Hemorrhage
- Being tested
- misoprostol
- Keywords
- Maternal, morbidity, mortality, pregnancy, postpartum hemorrhage, Cesarean Section
- Medical subject headings
- Postpartum Hemorrhage
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
misoprostolDrug
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Reduction of postpartum hemorrhage
Secondary outcomes (3)
Blood loss
medicamentous side effects
efficacy of medicaments
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted12 Apr 2005 (estimated)
- Study startJan 1999
- Primary completionFeb 2002
- Study completionFeb 2002
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Postpartum HemorrhageStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Irène Hösli, Prof. Dr. MD, Study chair, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00107874
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- M73/99
- Status last verified
- Apr 2019
- First submitted
- 11 Apr 2005
- Last updated
- 4 Apr 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 4 Apr 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Oral Misoprostol as a Second-line Alternative to Intravenous Oxytocin in Preventing Postoperative Blood Loss After Non-scheduled Cesarean Section: a Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00107874
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- M73/99
- Conditions
- Postpartum Hemorrhage
- Keywords
- Maternal, morbidity, mortality, pregnancy, postpartum hemorrhage, Cesarean Section
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 1999
- Primary completion
- Feb 2002 (actual)
- Study completion
- Feb 2002 (actual)
- First posted
- 12 Apr 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) ranks among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality, both in developed and developing countries.
With this trial, we sought to determine the effectiveness of oral misoprostol as an uterotonic drug in comparison with intravenous oxytocin, in patients with a low risk of PPH undergoing non-scheduled Cesarean section.
We therefore compared the intra- and postoperative blood loss, as well as drug related side effects in patients, treated by the same surgical and anesthesiological team in one institution.
Detailed description
Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is still among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. The incidence of PPH is reduced by active management of the third stage of labor which includes the use of uterotonics for pharmacological prophylaxis. However, there is an on-going debate about the optimal drug selection since uterotonics such as oxytocin and methylergometrine are liable for specific side effects and complications when administered within a dose range needed to be effective for PPH. In the search for an alternative to these conventional standard uterotonics, misoprostol (prostaglandin E1) has turned out to be an effective therapeutic option and has been implemented in actual treatment regimens. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of oral applicated misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin in reducing blood loss in low risk obstetric patients undergoing non-scheduled cesarean section (CS) under spinal anesthesia.
Comparison:
In this prospective, double blind study, parturients undergoing CS were randomized to receive either a) oral misoprostol and an infusion of normal saline supplemented with placebo, or b) an oral placebo and an infusion of normal saline, supplemented with oxytocin subsequently to intravenous oxytocin after cord clamping in both groups.
The primary outcomes were the amount of intra- and postoperative blood loss and the occurrence of drug-related side effects.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Non-scheduled primary or secondary Cesarean section (CS) after the 37th week of gestation
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Emergency CS
- Fetal distress
- Fetal malformations
- Preeclampsia and HELLP (Hemolysis-Elevated Liver enzymes-Low Platelet count syndrome)
- Hypersensitivity to prostaglandins
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| misoprostol | Drug | – |
Primary outcome
Reduction of postpartum hemorrhage
3 secondary outcomes
Blood loss
medicamentous side effects
efficacy of medicaments
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 4 Apr 2019.
Related trials for Postpartum Hemorrhage
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Effect of Two Different Doses of Intravenous Oxytocin on Patients Undergoing Elective Cesarean Section
Postpartum Hemorrhage, Uterine Atony
RecruitingPhase 3
Tranexamic Acid to Prevent Heavy Bleeding After Childbirth in Women at Higher Risk
Postpartum Hemorrhage
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Measured Versus Hemoglobin-Calculated Postpartum Blood Loss in Waterbirth
Postpartum Hemorrhage, Waterbirth
RecruitingObservational study
Long Term Outcome After Use of Vacuum-induced Tamponade for Postpartum Hemorrhage
Postpartum Hemorrhage, Treatment Outcome
RecruitingPhase 2
Prevention of Postpartum Hemorrhage With Tranexamic Acid
Post Partum Hemorrhage
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Irène Hösli, Prof. Dr. MD study chair
University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing misoprostol in people with Postpartum Hemorrhage, run by University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland at 1 site in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 11 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 4 Apr 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Reduction of postpartum hemorrhage. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 4 Apr 2019.