title: Postpartum misoprostol for preventing maternal mortality and morbidity.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The primary objective of postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) prevention and treatment is to reduce maternal deaths. Misoprostol has the major public health advantage over injectable medication that it can more easily be distributed at community level. Because misoprostol might have adverse effects unrelated to blood loss which might impact on mortality or severe morbidity, it is important to continue surveillance of all relevant evidence from randomised trials. This is particularly important as misoprostol is being introduced on a large scale for PPH prevention in low-income countries, and is commonly used for PPH treatment in well-resourced settings as well.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To review maternal deaths and severe morbidity in all randomised trials of misoprostol for prevention or treatment of PPH.
  
  
  METHODS
  We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (11 January 2013).
  
  
  METHODS
  We included randomised trials including pregnant women who received misoprostol in the postpartum period, versus placebo/no treatment or other uterotonics for prevention or treatment of PPH, and reporting on maternal death, severe morbidity or pyrexia.We planned to include cluster- and quasi-randomised trials in the analysis, as a very large number of women will be needed to obtain robust estimates of maternal mortality but we did not identify any for this version of the review. In future updates of this review we will include trials reported only as abstracts if sufficient information is available from the abstract or from the authors.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and extracted data.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We included 78 studies (59,216 women) and excluded 34 studies.There was no statistically significant difference in maternal mortality for misoprostol compared with control groups overall (31 studies; 11/19,715 versus 4/20,076 deaths; risk ratio (RR) 2.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 5.28); or for the trials of misoprostol versus placebo: 10 studies, 6/4626 versus 1/4707 ; RR 2.70; 95% CI 0.72 to 10.11; or for misoprostol versus other uterotonics: 21 studies, 5/15,089 versus 3/15,369 (19/100,000); RR 1.54; 95% CI 0.40 to 5.92. All 11 deaths in the misoprostol arms occurred in studies of misoprostol ≥ 600 µg.There was a statistically significant difference in the composite outcome 'maternal death or severe morbidity' for the comparison of misoprostol versus placebo (12 studies; average RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.81; Tau² = 0.00, I² = 0%) but not for the comparison of misoprostol versus other uterotonics (17 studies; average RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.52; Tau² = 1.81, I² = 69%). When we excluded hyperpyrexia from the composite outcome in exploratory analyses, there was no significant difference in either of these comparisons.Pyrexia > 38°C was increased with misoprostol compared with controls (56 studies, 2776/25,647 (10.8%) versus 614/26,800 (2.3%); average RR 3.97, 95% CI 3.13 to 5.04; Tau² = 0.47, I² = 80%). The effect was greater for trials using misoprostol 600 µg or more (27 studies; 2197/17,864 (12.3%) versus 422/18,161 (2.3%); average RR 4.64; 95% CI 3.33 to 6.46; Tau² = 0.51, I² = 86%) than for those using misoprostol 400 µg or less (31 studies; 525/6751 (7.8%) versus 185/7668 (2.4%); average RR 3.07; 95% CI 2.25 to 4.18; Tau² = 0.29, I² = 58%).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Misoprostol does not appear to increase or reduce severe morbidity (excluding hyperpyrexia) when used to prevent or treat PPH. Misoprostol did not increase or decrease maternal mortality. However, misoprostol is associated with an increased risk of pyrexia, particularly in dosages of 600 µg or more. Given that misoprostol is used prophylactically in very large numbers of healthy women, the greatest emphasis should be placed on limiting adverse effects. In this context, the findings of this review support the use of the lowest effective dose. As for any new medication being used on a large scale, continued vigilance for adverse effects is essential and there is a need for large randomised trials to further elucidate both the relative effectiveness and the risks of various dosages of misoprostol.
authors.affiliation: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, East London Hospital Complex, University of the Witwatersrand, University of FortHare, Eastern Cape Department of Health, East London, South Africa.justhof@gmail.com.
authors.forename: G Justus
authors.initials: GJ
authors.lastname: Hofmeyr
authors.forename: A Metin
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Gülmezoglu
authors.forename: Natalia
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Novikova
authors.forename: Theresa A
authors.initials: TA
authors.lastname: Lawrie
mesh_terms: D005260:Female; D005334:Fever / Q000139:chemically induced; D006801:Humans; D008428:Maternal Mortality; D016595:Misoprostol / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D010120:Oxytocics / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000009:adverse effects; D006473:Postpartum Hemorrhage / Q000401:mortality / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011247:Pregnancy; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
chemical_list: D010120:Oxytocics; D016595:Misoprostol