Subcutaneous terbutaline and oral nifedipine for intrapartum fetal resuscitation: a prospective randomized controlled study
10.3760/cma.j.cn113903-20210622-00569
- VernacularTitle:特布他林与硝苯地平用于产时胎儿宫内复苏：前瞻性随机对照研究
- Author:
Zheng ZHENG
1
;
Xiaodan DI
;
Di MAO
;
Xiaoyan SHA
;
Ningni JIANG
;
Huishu LIU
;
Qintian ZHENG
;
Yumian LAI
Author Information
1. 广州市妇女儿童医疗中心产科，广州 510623
- Keywords:
Terbutaline;
Nifedipine;
Fetal distress;
Delivery, obstetric;
Oxygen inhalation therapy;
Resuscitation;
Tocolytic agents;
Random allocation
- From:
Chinese Journal of Perinatal Medicine
2022;25(2):129-135
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the safety and efficacy of terbutaline and nifedipine for acute intrapartum fetal resuscitation (IUFR).Methods:This was a prospective randomized controlled study involving 110 pregnant women with non-reassuring fetal heart rate tracings (NRFHT) during delivery at Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center between January and April 2021. These women were randomly allocated to receive subcutaneous terbutaline sulphate (0.25 mg, terbutaline group) or oral nifedipine (10 mg, nifedipine group), with 55 subjects in each group. Hemodynamic parameters including blood pressure, heart rate, and oxygen saturation before and 5, 15 and 30 min after treatment as well as the success rate of intrapartum resuscitation, the onset time of medication, and the incidence of postpartum hemorrhage were analyzed using t test, Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Results:Two groups both showed no significant difference in the mean arterial pressure or oxygen saturation before or after treatment (all P>0.05). The heart rate was not affected in nifedipine group at any time points ( P>0.05). While the patients treated with terbutaline showed accelerated maternal heart rate 5, 15 and 30 min after administration as compared with the baseline[(97.0±20.2), (99.2±13.8), (91.8±12.6) vs (81.7±11.3) bpm, all P<0.001], but it began to decrease at 30 min, with a drop of 6.4 bpm compared with that at 15 min (95% CI: 1.5-11.2, P<0.05). None of the pregnant women had adverse reactions requiring medical intervention. The rates of successful acute resuscitation were similar in the two groups [terbutaline: 78.2% (43/55) vs nifedipine: 70.9% (39/55), χ 2= 0.77, P=0.381]. Terbutaline had a shorter onset time than nifedipine in slowing the frequency of contractions and returning fetal heart rate to class Ⅰ category [2(1-6) vs 6(1-10) min, U=2 348.50, P<0.001]. No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of NRFHT-indicated cesarean section, assisted vaginal delivery, or second dose of tocolysis within 1 h (all P>0.05) nor in blood loss volume, postpartum hemorrhage rate, low Apgar score, low umbilical artery pH value (pH<7.2), neonatal asphyxia rate, or neonatal intensive care admission rate (all P>0.05). Conclusion:Terbutaline spends less time than nifedipine to take effect and may be an alternative for acute IUFR without significant adverse outcomes.
