Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31887169›Full record

Trial reportPLoS medicine2019

Nitroglycerin for treatment of retained placenta: A randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre, double-blind trial in the UK.

Fiona C Denison, Kathryn F Carruthers, Jemma Hudson, Gladys McPherson, Gin Nie Chua, Mathilde Peace, Jane Brewin, Nina Hallowell, Graham Scotland, Julia Lawton and 3 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PLoS medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02085213 (GOT-IT Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 79% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02085213 phase4completednot on this map

GOT-IT Trial: A Pragmatic Group Sequential Placebo Controlled Randomised Trial to Determine the Effectiveness of Glyceryl Trinitrate for Retained Placenta.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of EdinburghRan2014 to 2017Enrolled1,107ConditionsPlacenta, RetainedArmsGlyceryl Trinitrate, Matched Placebo
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Fiona C DenisonTommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0371-2014
Kathryn F CarruthersTommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5896-2339
Jemma HudsonCentre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6440-6419
Gladys McPhersonCentre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Gin Nie ChuaHealth Economics Research Unit, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Mathilde PeaceTommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9410-3411
Jane BrewinTommy's, London, United Kingdom.
Nina HallowellWellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Graham ScotlandCentre for Healthcare Randomised Trials, Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Julia LawtonUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
John NorrieEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
Jane E NormanTommy's Centre for Maternal and Fetal Health, Medical Research Council Centre for Reproductive Health, Queen's Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6031-6953
GOT-IT investigator team
MRC Centre for Reproductive Health · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GBTommy's · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HERU1Chief Scientist Office HSRU1Department of Health 12/29/01Medical Research Council G0700452Medical Research Council G1002033Medical Research Council MR/N022556/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRetained placenta following vaginal delivery is a major cause of postpartum haemorrhage. Currently, the only effective treatments for a retained placenta are the surgical procedures of manual removal of placenta (MROP) and uterine curettage, which are not universally available, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. The objective of the trial was to determine whether sublingual nitroglycerin spray was clinically effective and cost-effective for medical treatment of retained placenta following vaginal delivery. METHODS AND

findingsA randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was undertaken between October 2014 and July 2017 at 29 delivery units in the UK (Edinburgh, Glasgow, Manchester, Newcastle, Preston, Warrington, Chesterfield, Crewe, Durham, West Middlesex, Aylesbury, Furness, Southampton, Bolton, Sunderland, Oxford, Nottingham [2 units], Burnley, Chertsey, Stockton-on-Tees, Middlesborough, Chester, Darlington, York, Reading, Milton Keynes, Telford, Frimley). In total, 1,107 women with retained placenta following vaginal delivery were recruited. The intervention was self-administered 2 puffs of sublingual nitroglycerin (800 μg; intervention, N = 543) or placebo spray (control, N = 564). The primary clinical outcome was the need for MROP, assessed at 15 minutes following administration of the intervention. Analysis was based on the intention-to-treat principle. The primary safety outcome was measured blood loss between study drug administration and transfer to the postnatal ward or other clinical area. The primary patient-sided outcomes were satisfaction with treatment and side-effect profile, assessed by questionnaires pre-discharge and 6 weeks post-delivery. Secondary clinical outcomes were measured at 5 and 15 minutes after study drug administration and prior to hospital discharge. There was no statistically significant or clinically meaningful difference in need for MROP by 15 minutes (primary clinical outcome, 505 [93.3%] for nitroglycerin versus 518 [92.0%] for placebo, odds ratio [OR] 1.01 [95% CI 0.98-1.04], p = 0.393) or blood loss (<500 ml: nitroglycerin, 238 [44.3%], versus placebo, 249 [44.5%]; 500 ml-1,000 ml: nitroglycerin, 180 [33.5%], versus placebo, 224 [40.0%]; >1,000 ml: nitroglycerin, 119 [22.2%], versus placebo, 87 [15.5%]; ordinal OR 1.14 [95% CI 0.88-1.48], p = 0.314) or satisfaction with treatment (nitroglycerin, 288 [75.4%], versus placebo, 303 [78.1%]; OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.62-1.22], p = 0.411) or health service costs (mean difference [£] 55.3 [95% CI -199.20 to 309.79]). Palpitations following drug administration were reported more often in the nitroglycerin group (36 [9.8%] versus 15 [4.0%], OR 2.60 [95% CI 1.40-4.84], p = 0.003). There were 52 serious adverse events during the trial, with no statistically significant difference in likelihood between groups (nitroglycerin, 27 [5.0%], versus placebo, 26 [4.6%]; OR 1.13 [95% CI 0.54-2.38], p = 0.747). The main limitation of our study was the low return rate for the 6-week postnatal questionnaire. There were, however, no differences in questionnaire return rates between study groups or between women who did and did not have MROP, with the patient-reported use of outpatient and primary care services at 6 weeks accounting for only a small proportion (approximately 5%) of overall health service costs.

conclusionsIn this study, we found that nitroglycerin is neither clinically effective nor cost-effective as a medical treatment for retained placenta, and has increased side effects, suggesting it should not be used. Further research is required to identify an effective medical treatment for retained placenta to reduce the morbidity caused by this condition, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where surgical management is not available.

trial registrationISRCTN.com ISRCTN88609453 ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02085213.

Indexed as

Administration, SublingualAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisDelivery, ObstetricDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansNitroglycerinPlacenta, RetainedPostpartum HemorrhagePregnancyUnited KingdomNitroglycerin

Identifiers

PMID31887169
PMCPMC6936786
OpenAlexW2997737382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.