DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.

13061
www.bjog.org

Prevention of preterm delivery with vaginal

progesterone in women with preterm labour
(4P): randomised double-blind placebo-controlled
trial
B Martinez de Tejada,a A Karolinski,b MC Ocampo,b C Laterra,c I Hösli,d D Fernández,e D Surbek,f
M Huespe,g G Drack,h A Bunader,i S Rouillier,j G López de Degani,k E Seidenstein,l E Prentl,m
J Antón,n F Krähenmann,o D Nowacki,p M Poncelas,q JC Nassif,r R Papera,s C Tuma,t R Espoile,u
O Tiberio,v G Breccia,w A Messina,x B Peker,y E Schinner,z BW Mol,aa L Kanterewicz,b V Wainer,b
M Boulvain,a V Othenin-Girard,a MV Bertolino,b O Irion,a for the 4P trial group*
a
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
b
Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional -CISAP- (Population Health Research Centre), Hospital GA Carlos G Durand, Buenos Aires,
Argentina c Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Materno Infantil Ramón Sardá, Buenos Aires, Argentina d Department of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital, University Basel, Basel, Switzerland e Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital
Materno Infantil de San Isidro, San Isidro, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina f Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of
Medicine, University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland g Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Donación
Francisco Santojanni, Buenos Aires, Argentina h Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Frauenklinik, Kantonspital, St Gall, Switzerland
i
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Maternidad Nuestra Señora De Las Mercedes, San Miguel de Tucumán, Argentina
j
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland k Department of Obstetrics and
Gynaecology, Hospital Materno Infantil San Roque, Entre Rı́os, Argentina l Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Bernardino
Rivadavia, Buenos Aires, Argentina m Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Frauenklinik, Kantonspital, Winterthur, Switzerland
n
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Heroes de Malvinas, Merlo, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina o Department of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland p Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital
Magdalena V. de Martı́nez, General Pacheco, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina q Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Dr.
Cosme Argerich, Buenos Aires, Argentina r Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Carlos G Durand, Buenos Aires, Argentina
s
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Villa Dolores, Córdoba, Argentina t Hospital Virgen del Carmen, Zárate, Provincia de
Buenos Aires, Argentina u Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Municipal Ostaciana B de Lavignolle, Morón, Provincia de
Buenos Aires, Argentina v Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Comunal de Tigre, Tigre, Provincia de Buenos Aires,
Argentina w Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital J. M. Penna, Buenos Aires, Argentina x Department of Obstetrics and
Gynaecology, Hospital Dr. T. Alvarez, Buenos Aires, Argentina y Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Interzonal Alberto
Antranik Eurnekian, Ezeiza, Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina z Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital J. B. Iturraspe, Santa
Fe, Argentina aa Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Correspondence: B Martinez de Tejada, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, 30
Boulevard de la Cluse, 1211 Geneva 14, Switzerland. Email begona.martinezdetejada@hcuge.ch

Accepted 17 July 2014. Published Online 11 September 2014.

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of 200 mg of daily vaginal
natural progesterone to prevent preterm birth in women with
preterm labour.
Design Multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled
trial.
Setting Twenty-nine centres in Switzerland and Argentina.
0/7
Population A total of 385 women with preterm labour (24
336/7 weeks of gestation) treated with acute tocolysis.
Methods Participants were randomly allocated to either 200 mg
daily of self-administered vaginal progesterone or placebo within
48 hours of starting acute tocolysis.
Main outcome measures Primary outcome was delivery before
37 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes were delivery
before 32 and 34 weeks, adverse effects, duration of tocolysis,
re-admissions for preterm labour, length of hospital stay,
to and neonatal morbidity and mortality. The study was
ended prematurely based on results of the intermediate
analysis.

Trial registration number: NCT00536003. Results Preterm birth occurred in 42.5% of women in the
*4P Trial group members are in Appendix 1.
progesterone group versus 35.5% in the placebo group (relative

ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 1

 Martinez de Tejada et al.
risk [RR] 1.2; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.93–1.5).
Delivery at <32 and <34 weeks did not differ between the two
groups (12.9 versus 9.7%; [RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.7–2.5] and 19.7
versus 12.9% [RR 1.5; 95% CI 0.9–2.4], respectively). The
duration of tocolysis, hospitalisation, and recurrence of preterm
labour were comparable between groups. Neonatal morbidity
occurred in 44 (22.8%) cases on progesterone versus 35 (18.8%)
cases on placebo (RR: 1.2; 95% CI 0.82–1.8), whereas there were
4 (2%) neonatal deaths in each study group.
Please cite this paper as: Martinez de Tejada B, Karolinski A, Ocampo MC, Laterra C, Hösli I, Fernández D, Surbek D, Huespe M, Drack G, Bunader A,
Rouillier S, López de Degani G, Seidenstein E, Prentl E, Antón J, Krähenmann F, Nowacki D, Poncelas M, Nassif JC, Papera R, Tuma C, Espoile R, Tiberio
O, Breccia G, Messina A, Peker B, Schinner E, Mol BW, Kanterewicz L, Wainer V, Boulvain M, Othenin-Girard V, Bertolino MV, Irion O, for the 4P trial
group. Prevention of preterm delivery with vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour (4P): randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial.
BJOG 2014; DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.13061.
Introduction
Preterm birth (PTB) (<37 weeks of gestation) is the leading
cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality. In developed
countries, the incidence of preterm delivery varies between
7 and 12%.1,2 This rate is higher in developing countries
where there is limited availability of neonatal care and
there are poorer clinical outcomes.3,4 Infants born preterm
account for 75% of perinatal deaths and half of all child-
hood neurodevelopmental disabilities.5,6 Consequently, PTB
contributes to a large burden of disease, including high
immediate and long-term medical care costs, the need for
special education services and institutionalised care for
physically and mentally disabled infants.7,8
In many cases, PTB occurs after spontaneous preterm
labour (PTL) (preterm uterine contractions with cervical
effacement and/or dilatation) and intact membranes.9,10
Despite the identification of various risk factors, no inter-
vention has been found to be effective for the reduction of
PTB in women with symptoms of PTL.11,12 Acute tocolysis
is effective in delaying the delivery of the fetus for 2–7 days
in the short term but it has not been shown to reduce long--
term complications from preterm birth.13–18 In addition,
studies have failed to show a beneficial effect of maintenance
tocolysis on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes.19–22
In recent years, progesterone was found to be effective
for the prevention of PTB in women with a previous his-
tory of PTB and in those with a mid-trimester short cer-
vix.23–30 However, its effectiveness in women with PTL has
been less well evaluated with conflicting results reported.
Several small and unblinded clinical studies have reported a
beneficial effect of natural progesterone or 17-hydroxypro-
gesterone caproate (17P) in reducing the duration of tocol-
ysis treatment and preventing PTB.31–34 Nevertheless, the
largest study published to date found no efficacy for the
prevention of PTB with the use of 17P.35 In an attempt to
2 ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Conclusion There is no evidence that the daily administration of
200 mg vaginal progesterone decreases preterm birth or improves
neonatal outcome in women with preterm labour.
Keywords Maternal tolerance, neonatal morbidity, neonatal
mortality, neonatology, obstetrics, preterm delivery, preterm
labour, vaginal progesterone.
Linked article This article is commented on by NorwitzThom
ER. To view this mini commentary visit http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
1471-0528.13108.
bridge this knowledge gap, we conducted a multicentre,
placebo-controlled trial to determine whether the adminis-
tration of natural progesterone vaginally was effective in
decreasing the risk of preterm delivery in women with
PTL, who were also treated with tocolysis.
Methods
The Prevention of Preterm Delivery with Vaginal Progester-
one in Women with Preterm Labour (4P) study was an
international, multicentre, randomised, prospective, dou-
ble-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing vaginal natu-
ral progesterone versus placebo in women with PTL.
Setting and participants
We carried out the trial in nine hospitals in Switzerland
(from July 2006 to February 2011) and 20 hospitals in Argen-
tina (from September 2008 to September 2012). Study coor-
dination was carried out at the research unit of Geneva
University Hospitals (HUG) (Geneva, Switzerland) and the
Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional (Population
Health Research Centre [CISAP]) (Buenos Aires, Argentina).
Pregnant women with threatened PTB between 24 and
<34 weeks of gestation (based on ultrasound scan before
22 weeks of gestation) and treated with acute tocolysis
(b-mimetics, oxytocin receptor antagonist, or cal-
cium-channel blockers, depending on local protocols) and
corticosteroids for fetal lung maturation were eligible for
inclusion in the study. Threatened PTB was defined as reg-
ular phasic uterine contractions with a minimum of two
painful contractions in 10 minutes averaged over 30 min-
utes on cardiotocogram, together with at least one of the
following criteria: shortened cervix detected by vaginal
ultrasound scanning (cervical length ≤30 mm until
31 weeks of gestation or ≤25 mm from 32 weeks of gesta-
tion onwards);36–38 short and dilated cervix detected

clinically (cervical length ≤10 mm or Bishop score ≥ 6);39
progressive cervical shortening detected by serial clinical or
ultrasound examinations (≥5 mm difference between two
examinations); or a positive qualitative fetal fibronectin test
(if available in the centre; QuikcheckfFN or TCM Holog-
ic).40–42
Exclusion criteria were: maternal age <18 years, multiple
pregnancy, cervical cerclage in situ, polyhydramnios
(defined as an amniotic fluid index >95th centile for gesta-
tional age or a greatest amniotic pocket >8 cm), premature
rupture of membranes, suspected clinical chorioamnionitis
(defined as elevated white blood cell count, elevated
C-reactive protein, maternal and/or fetal tachycardia, uter-
ine tenderness and/or foul smelling amniotic fluid), cervical
dilatation >3 cm, placenta praevia or suspected placental
abruption, intrauterine growth restriction, non-reassuring
fetal wellbeing, pre-eclampsia, severe hypertension, any
other maternal or fetal pathology that required medically
indicated preterm delivery and anticipated difficulty with
follow up. Eligible women were informed about the study
by the local investigator and provided written consent
before recruitment.
Randomisation and intervention
After obtaining informed consent and within 48 hours after
initiating tocolysis, the local investigator randomly allo-
cated participants to either vaginal capsules of 200 mg of
natural progesterone or placebo. The woman was asked to
self-administer the treatment once a day until 36 weeks
and 6 days of gestation or until preterm delivery, which-
ever occurred first. Medication was stopped after preterm
rupture of the membranes before term. Randomisation was
performed in a 1:1 ratio using a list created with an inde-
pendent, centralised, computer-generated randomisation
sequence (PASW STATISTICS, version 18; IBM Corp.,
Armonk, NY, USA) stratified by centre and by gestational
age group at inclusion (group 1: <28 weeks; group 2: 28 to
<32 weeks; group 3: ≥32 weeks). The randomisation codes
were kept at the pharmacy departments of HUG and
CISAP.
Placebo capsules had the same appearance, feel and
odour as the active medication. Both the active drug and
placebo were stored in boxes with the same appearance
and weight (i.e. the local investigator, the clinical team and
the women were not aware of the type of medication
administered). Three different sets of boxes containing pro-
gesterone or placebo to be administered either from 24 to
37 weeks (91 days), 28 to 37 weeks (63 days), or 32 to
37 weeks (35 days) of gestation were centrally prepared at
the HUG pharmacy for the Swiss centres and at the CISAP
pharmacy for the Argentinean centres. Boxes were clearly
labelled with the corresponding study number, gestational
age group and number of capsules. This strategy minimised
ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour
the provision of unnecessary capsules and allowed the strat-
ification of the recruited women in the two study groups
by gestational age at inclusion. Each centre was provided
initially with five boxes of each set and regularly supplied
with additional boxes as necessary.
Practical issues
Study participants were monitored using the following clin-
ical and laboratory examinations, depending on local prac-
tices: temperature; heart rate and blood pressure
measurement; fetal heart rate monitoring; cervical examina-
tion; white blood cell count and C-reactive protein mea-
surement; and urinary, genital and recto-vaginal
microbiological cultures. Women with positive culture
results were treated with specific antibiotics following the
local guidelines at each centre. For each PTL episode result-
ing in a new hospitalisation, the standard local protocol
was repeated and clinical data were collected. Regarding
Group B Streptococcus (GBS) prophylaxis, women were
screened for GBS colonisation at admission and received
intrapartum GBS antibiotic prophylaxis if colonised or if
unknown status and delivering preterm.
Usual care
Women were managed by their obstetrician from the time
of inclusion until delivery. Antenatal care decisions were
left to the attending clinicians at each institution. Members
of the research team were available to respond to any que-
ries regarding the study protocol.
Outcomes
The primary outcome was preterm delivery before
37 weeks of gestation. Prespecified secondary outcomes
were as follows.
Obstetrical outcomes: preterm delivery before 34 weeks and before
32 weeks of gestation; duration of tocolysis; length of hospital stay
for the initial episode; and the overall number of re-admissions for
PTL.
Neonatal outcomes:newborn birth weight; hospitalisation at the neonatal
intensive care unit; a composite estimate of neonatal morbidity includ-
ing the following variables: transient tachypnoea; respiratory distress
syndrome; bronchopulmonary dysplasia; ventilatory support (continu-
ous positive airway pressure, intubation), necrotising enterocolitis;
intraventricular haemorrhage; periventricular leucomalacia; retinopathy;
sepsis and patent ductus arteriosus; and neonatal death.
Drug tolerance: local reactions (soreness, itching, bruising, and vaginal
discharge) and systemic reactions (any documented unusual sign or
symptom possibly related to drug administration).
Definitions of obstetrical and neonatal complications
were standardised across centres according to the World
Health Organization standards. Charts were locally
reviewed by an obstetrician and a neonatologist unaware of
the allocation to the study group to determine the clinical
outcomes (assessor blinding).
3
 Martinez de Tejada et al.
Data collection and management
After informed consent, we collected baseline characteristics
including a socio-economic score (range 2–12) that took
into account the woman’s educational level and partner’s
professional status. A score >10 indicated having achieved
tertiary education/high socio-economic status.43 Pregnancy
outcomes and medication side effects were prospectively
collected using a case report form designed specifically for
the trial. Every 2 weeks, participants were asked to provide
the number of vaginal suppositories that they had used.
They were asked also whether they had consulted a physi-
cian for PTL symptoms, had experienced adverse events,
had undergone any medical procedures, or had been given
any other medication since their last visit. After delivery,
the study personnel reviewed all prenatal, delivery, postpar-
tum and newborn records and documented the date of
delivery, newborn birthweight and other neonatal out-
comes.
Severe maternal or neonatal complications were immedi-
ately reported to the coordinating centres, which notified
the Swiss regulatory agency for the authorisation and
supervision of therapeutic products (Swissmedic) or its
Argentinean counterpart (ANMAT: Administración Nac-
ional de Medicamentos, Alimentos y Tecnologı́a Medica).
We assessed compliance by counting the number of
unused capsules returned to the coordinating centres. We
defined noncompliance as being when the woman has
administered <80% of the capsules prescribed.
After completion, case report forms were sent to the
research coordinating centre to ensure quality and comple-
tion of data, and for entry into a dedicated database. Clini-
cal audits were regularly carried out to evaluate the quality
of data collection by each hospital.
Sample size
We calculated our sample size based on differences between
the two study groups in the likelihood of preterm delivery
before 37 weeks of gestation. Preterm delivery among
women with PTL receiving routine care was postulated to
occur in 30–40% of cases.44 A sample of 626 women was
sufficient to detect a risk reduction from 30 to 20% in pre-
term delivery before 37 weeks with 80% power and a two
-sided type I error of 5%.
Statistical methods
The main statistical analyses were performed on an inten-
tion-to-treat basis using IBM SPSS (version 19; SPSS Inc.,
Chicago, IL, USA) and OPEN EPI softwares. Frequencies in
categorical variables were expressed as a number with the
percentage of the total allocation arm and compared using
Fisher’s exact test. Continuous measures were presented as
means with standard deviations and compared using
Student’s t-test, or as medians and ranges and compared
4 ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
using nonparametric statistics if not normally distributed.
A P-value < 0.05 (two-tailed) was considered to indicate
statistical significance. The incidence of the primary out-
come (delivery before 37 weeks) and of most secondary
outcomes was calculated among all women with the rele-
vant data at delivery. The incidence of preterm delivery
before 32 weeks of gestation was computed with women
included into the study before 32 weeks of gestation as the
denominator.
The effect of the intervention was expressed as relative
risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) around these
estimates. We performed a secondary analysis (per proto-
col analyses) excluding women who were wrongly included
in the study (violation of inclusion and/or exclusion crite-
ria) or who discontinued treatment, either by themselves
or by their physicians. A time-to-event analysis was per-
formed to compare the probability of remaining undeliv-
ered after 36 completed weeks between the two groups.
Kaplan–Meier curves were compared using the log-rank
test. The analysis was conducted without any knowledge of
group allocation.
A planned interim analysis (after collection of delivery
data on 300 recruited women) on the effectiveness and
safety was performed by a panel of independent experts
(data safety monitoring board and two independent statis-
ticians) not involved in the trial or its design. The criteria
to stop the study were described in the protocol and fol-
lowed the O’Brien and Fleming rule, i.e. P < 0.015 for the
primary outcome.45 At the interim analysis, conducted
when outcome data were available for 302 women (48% of
the planned sample), a conditional power analysis revealed
that even if recruitment continued to the final sample size
of 626 women, the probability of showing a benefit of pro-
gesterone for the primary outcome was 0%. Based on the
result of this analysis, study enrolment was stopped in June
2012. At that time, 385 women had been randomised.
Results
Of 1466 women hospitalised for PTL during the study per-
iod, 576 were eligible for inclusion into the study, of whom
191 declined to participate in the trial. In total, 385 women
were included and randomly allocated to progesterone
(n = 197) or placebo (n = 188). Six women (four in the
progesterone group and two in the placebo group) were
lost to follow up (no data on delivery and newborn). Data
from 379 women were included in the analysis, of which
193 were randomised to receive progesterone and 186 to
placebo (Figure 1).
For the per protocol analysis, 19 women (eight in the
placebo group and 11 in the progesterone group) were
excluded because of protocol violations (n = 10) or treat-
ment interruption (n = 9; four cases of voluntary with-

Enrolment
Assessed for eligibility (n = 1467)
Randomised (n = 385)
Allocation
Allocated to PROGESTERONE (n = 197)
Received allocated intervention (n = 197)
Follow up
Lost to follow up (No data from delivery because
delivered in other hospital) (n = 3)
Discontinued intervention (withdrew consent) (n = 1)
Analysis
Analysed (intention-to-treat) (n = 193)
Excluded from analysis per protocol (n = 11)
Randomised without meeting inclusion criteria (n = 6)
Stopped treatment (n = 5)
Figure 1. Randomisation, treatment and follow up of participants.
drawal by women and five cases due to the decision made
by the attending physicians) leading to 360 women (Fig-
ure 1).
Baseline characteristics of the women included in the
two groups were comparable (Table 1). Included women
had a mean age of 27.6 years (SD 6.2), and a mean gesta-
tional age at study entry of 29.5 weeks (SD 2.7). There
were 136 (35.9%) nulliparous women and 91 (24.0%) had
a history of previous preterm delivery or late miscarriage.
Data on cervical length were available only for patients
from Swiss centres; data on fetal fibronectin were available
in 61 women from Switzerland.
The overall number of women with preterm delivery was
148 (39%) <37 weeks, 62 (16.4%) <34 weeks, and 36 out
of 317 women (11%) <32 weeks. There were 44 (11.6%)
cases of premature rupture of the membranes before term
(22 in each group) and 26 cases of delivery induced before
term (8/193 [4.1%] in the progesterone group and 18/186
[9.7%] in the placebo group; P = 0.05).
ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour
Excluded (n = 1082)
Not meeting inclusion criteria (n = 890)
Declined to participate (n = 192)
Other reasons (n = 0)
Allocated to PLACEBO (n = 188)
Received allocated intervention (n = 188)
Lost to follow up (No data from delivery because
delivered in other hospital (n = 2)
Discontinued intervention (n = 0)
Analysed (intention-to-treat) (n = 186)
Excluded from analysis per protocol (n = 8)
Randomised without meeting inclusion criteria (n = 4)
Stopped treatment (n = 4)
Two hundred and seventy-three (72%) women returned
their unused medication and empty blisters to the coordi-
nating centres: 142 women (52%) in the progesterone
group and 131 women (48%) in the placebo group. Among
those, compliance was good in 83 (58%) women in the
progesterone group and in 76 (58%) in the placebo group.
Information for not complying with the study medication
in the remaining women was not recorded.
Primary outcome and preterm delivery
Preterm birth <37 weeks occurred in 42.5% of women in the
progesterone group versus 35.5% of women in the placebo
group (P = 0.20). Delivery before 34 weeks and delivery
before 32 weeks were also similar between groups (Table 2).
After excluding women with an indication for elective
preterm delivery, there were 74/185 (40.0%) spontaneous
preterm deliveries among the progesterone group and 48/
168 (28.6%) in the placebo group (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.04–
1.88; P = 0.03).
5
 Martinez de Tejada et al.

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of participants at study entry

Characteristics Progesterone (n = 193) Placebo (n = 186)

Ethnic origin, n/total (%)

Caucasian 98/192 (51.0) 92/184 (50.0)
Hispanic 79/192 (41.1) 85/184 (46.2)
Other 15/192 (7.8) 7/184 (3.8)
Maternal age, n/total (%) 193/193 (100) 186/186 (100)
Maternal age in years, 27.92 (6.47) [18–42] 27.34 (5.79) [18–43]
mean (SD) and range
Maternal weight, n/total (%) 187/193 (96.9) 183/186 (98.4)
Maternal weight in kg 58.98 (11.51) [40–109] 58.42 (9.77) [36–95]
(mean  SD) and range
Family situation
Couple 183/193 (94.8) 174/183 (95.1)
Single with no partner 10/193 (5.2) 9/183 (4.9)
Professional situation
Working (employed or independent) 82/190 (43.2) 86/184 (46.7)
Other 108/190 (56.8) 98/184 (53.3)
SEE score
≤10 170/193 (88.1) 162/186 (87.1)
>10 23/193 (11.9) 24/186 (12.9)
Gynaecological surgery/malformation (yes) 19/193 (9.8) 23/186 (12.4)
Nulliparity (yes) 63/193 (32.6) 73/186 (39.2)
One or more late abortion (yes) 2/193 (1.0) 1/186 (0.5)
One or more preterm birth (yes) 46/193 (23.8) 39/186 (21.0)
Smoking during pregnancy (yes) 37/193 (19.2) 37/186 (19.9)
Haemorrage during pregnancy (yes) 19/192 (9.9) 19/186 (10.2)
Gestational age at entry, n/total (%) 193/193 (100) 186/186 (100)
Gestational age at entry, weeks 29.50 (2.74) [24–34] 29.51 (2.72) [24–33]
(mean  SD) and range
CL measurement at entry (yes) 124/193 (64.2) 124/186 (66.7)
CL at entry, mm (mean  SD) 19.35 (8.36) [4–45] 19.56 (8.15) [0–46]
fFN at entry, n/total (%) 27/191 (14.1) 34/183 (18.6)
Positive fFN at entry, n/total (%) 12/26 (46.2) 14/33 (42.4)
Tocolyses given at randomisation 193/193 (100) 186/186 (100)
Indomethacin 3/193 (1.5) 4/186 (2.1)
b-mimetic 158/193 (81.0) 143/186 (74.1)
Oxytocin receptor antagonist 15/193 (7.6) 20/186 (10.4)
Calcium inhibitors 22/193 (11.1) 26/186 (13.7)

CL, cervical length; fFN, fibronectin; SD, standard deviation; SEE score, socio-economic score.

The time-to-event (preterm delivery) analysis with
censoring at 37 weeks when delivering at term showed a
hazard ratio of 1.3 (95% CI 0.9–1.8; log-rank Mantel–Cox:
0.11; Figure 2). Duration of tocolysis, hospitalisation, and
frequency of a new episode of PTL were comparable
between the study groups, as were the number of women
receiving corticosteroids for fetal lung maturation and
undergoing caesarean delivery (Table 2).
After exclusion of cases of protocol violation and discon-
tinuation of medication, the per protocol analysis showed
similar rates of preterm delivery before 37 and <32 weeks
of gestation between the two groups. In this analysis, there
were more women delivering before 34 weeks of gestation
in the progesterone group compared with the placebo
group (RR 1.7; 95% CI 1.01–2.67; Table 2).
Neonatal outcomes
Neonatal weight at birth, Apgar score at 5 min <7, neona-
tal intensive care unit hospitalisation, neonatal mortality
and the composite outcome of morbidity were also compa-
rable between the two groups (Table 3).
Side effects/adverse events
The incidence of side effects (mainly vaginal pruritus,
burning, or increased secretions) was comparable between
the two groups: 11 (5.7%) in the progesterone group and

6 ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

 Vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour

Table 2. Obstetrical endpoints

Variable Progesterone (n = 193) Placebo (n = 186) P RR 95% CI

Gestational age at delivery (weeks) (mean  SD) and range 36.05 (3.54) [24–41] 36.63 (3.11) [25–41] 0.09
Delivery <37 weeks, n/total n (%) 82/193 (42.5) 66/186 (35.5) 0.20 1.2 0.93–1.5
Delivery <34 weeks, n/total n (%) 38/193 (19.7) 24/186 (12.9) 0.10 1.5 0.95–2.4
Delivery <32 weeks, n/total n (%) 21/163 (12.9) 15/154 (9.7) 0.48 1.32 0.71–2.5
Tocolysis duration (hours), median (range) 48.00 (0–1740) 48.00 (0–1672) 0.84
Readmissions for preterm labour (yes) 13/193 (6.7) 19/184 (10.3) 0.29 0.65 0.33–1.28
Duration of hospitalisation (days), median (range) 6.00 (0–97) 7.00 (1–68) 0.09
Time to delivery (days), median (range) 45.00 (0–114) 52.00 (2–112) 0.13
Caesarean section, n/total n (%) 41/193 (21.2) 37/186 (19.9) 0.84 1.07 0.72–1.59
Corticosteroids for lung maturation, n/total (%) 191/193 (99.0) 185/186 (99.5) >0.99 0.99 0.97–1.01
Analysis ‘per protocol’*
Delivery <37 weeks, n/total n (%) 77/182 (55.0) 63/178 (35.4) 0.22 1.20 0.92–1.55
Delivery <34 weeks, n/total n (%) 37/182 (20.3) 22/178 (12.4) 0.06 1.65 1.01–2.67
Delivery <32 weeks, n/total n (%) 20/154 (13.0) 15/148(10.1) 0.55 1.28 0.68–2.41

*Analysis after exclusion of protocol violations and medication discontinuations.

37 weeks. In the placebo group, there were two neonatal

deaths (at 24 and 28 weeks), one intrauterine death at
35 weeks, one fetus with hydrocephalus diagnosed at
24 weeks of gestation, one case of polyhydramnios at term
with a neonatal diagnosis of genital malformation and
hypotonus, and one women was hospitalised at 31 weeks
due to a car accident.

Discussion
Main findings
In women with PTL treated with acute tocolysis, treatment
with 200 mg of vaginal natural progesterone daily did not
reduce preterm delivery or improve perinatal outcomes.
Progesterone treatment had no effect on the duration of
tocolysis, the duration of the first or any subsequent hospi-
tal stays, or the rate of recurrence of PTL.

Strengths and limitations

Figure 2. Distribution of time to delivery (in days) in the progesterone
and placebo groups.
12 (6.5%) in the placebo group (RR 0.9; 95% CI 0.40–
1.96).
There were ten serious adverse events (four in the pro-
gesterone group and six in the placebo group). In the
progesterone arm, there were three neonatal deaths from
complications due to extreme prematurity (two at
24 weeks and one at 28 weeks) and one pregnant woman
with liver cholestasis who had labour induced at
Our study is the largest randomised trial evaluating the
effectiveness of progesterone to prevent PTB in women
with singleton pregnancies and PTL. The inclusion criteria
were strict and corresponded to those most frequently used
in clinical practice. The trial was conducted in different
hospitals over two countries (Switzerland and Argentina)
with different health systems and among women of differ-
ent socio-economic levels. This increased the generalisabili-
ty of our results to other settings. The fact that the
tocolytic treatments employed in the study are those that
are currently used by most clinicians leads also to an
increased ability for generalisation of our results. We chose
vaginal progesterone suppositories because most previous

ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists 7

 Martinez de Tejada et al.
Table 3. Neonatal outcome
Progesterone (n = 193)
Birthweight (g), median (range) 2880.00 (500–4685)
Apgar <7 at 5 minutes, n/total (%) 7/193 (3.6)
Neonatal mortality, n/total (%) 4/193 (2.1)
NICU hospitalisation, n/total (%) 57/191 (29.8)
Morbidity, n/total (%)* 44/193 (22.8)
NICU, neonatal intensive care unit.
*Composite outcome including any of the following: transient tachypnoea, respiratory distress syndrome, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, ventilatory
support (CPAP, intubation), necrotising enterocolitis; intraventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leucomalacia, retinopathy, sepsis, and patent
ductus arteriosus.
studies had shown a beneficial effect of this treatment
among asymptomatic women with a short cervix.46 More-
over, vaginal progesterone is better tolerated and more
easily administered than intramuscular 17P.
A weakness of our study is the method used to assess
compliance to drug treatment. Over 25% of participating
women did not return the unused medication, and among
those who did, we cannot be certain that they really
administered it. The number of women returning medica-
tion and demonstrating adequate medication compliance
was similar between the two groups.
Interpretation
We included women with a short cervix as measured by
vaginal ultrasound (<10th centile for the gestational age at
inclusion),47 as well as women with marked clinical
changes of the cervix.48–50 We included also women with
contractions and positive fibronectin test results, which is
another group at high risk for preterm delivery.26,41 Never-
theless, fibronectin was investigated in only 16% of the
women. Although our inclusion criteria were heterogeneous
due to the multiple centres participating in the study, the
high preterm delivery rate (39%) implies that the popula-
tion was indeed at high risk for preterm delivery to assess
the effectiveness of progesterone in the prevention of this
outcome.
We investigated the effect of progesterone in women in
conjunction with acute tocolysis as previous studies showed
that the combination of progesterone with nifedipine or
b-mimetics had synergistic effects and the total dosage of
tocolytic medications could be reduced.51–53 However, we
found neither a difference in the duration of tocolytic
treatment between the progesterone and the placebo group
nor an interaction between progesterone and the various
tocolytics.
Several randomised controlled studies have assessed the
effectiveness of progesterone on prolongation of pregnancy
or reduction of prematurity in women with PTL. Some
have used intramuscular 17P as maintenance tocolysis: Fac-
8 ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Placebo (n = 186) P RR 95% CI
2955.00 (820–4900) 0.5
5/186 (2.7) 0.82 1.35 0.43–4.18
4/186 (2.2) >0.99 0.96 0.24–3.80
47/185 (25.4) 0.42 1.17 0.84–1.63
35/186 (18.8) 0.41 1.21 0.82–1.80
chinetti et al.33,34 found that 17P was associated with both
a reduction in the risk of cervical shortening and preterm
delivery. By contrast, Rozenberg et al. (the largest trial so
far) and Tan et al. found no difference in median time to
delivery, rates of preterm delivery before 37, 34 or 32 weeks
of gestation, or adverse perinatal outcomes, with Rozenberg
et al. specifically reporting a potential worsening of the
outcome after the use of 17P. Of note, none of these stud-
ies was placebo controlled.35,54 Regarding natural progester-
one, two studies have used oral progesterone and observed
some positive effects.53,55 Noblot et al.55 performed a dou-
ble-blind trial of 44 women randomised during an episode
of preterm labour and treated with intravenous b-agonists.
Although they showed no significant difference in the pro-
longation of pregnancy, the mean quantity of b-agonists
administered and associated costs were significantly lower
in the progesterone group.55 In the study by Erny et al.,53
high doses of progesterone were used as acute tocolysis and
compared with placebo. Both studies recruited very few
women (that of Noblot et al. only included 44 of the 60
cases required) and were of low quality. In relation to the
use of vaginal natural progesterone, Borna and Sahabi (70
women) and Arikan et al. (83 women) showed that, in
women with PTL, vaginal progesterone (400 and 200 mg
daily, respectively) was effective in prolonging the mean
gestational age at the time of delivery or in postponing the
delivery.31,56 In addition, progesterone was effective in
increasing neonatal weight and in reducing the incidence of
low birthweight and admission to the neonatal intensive
care unit. These studies were small, not placebo-controlled
and restricted to a single centre. Our study is larger than
previous trials and placebo-controlled. In addition, PTL
was defined either with objective criteria (sonographic
short cervix or positive fibronectin test) or with specific
and strict clinical criteria. Borna and Sahabi, and Arikan
et al. included women with contractions and a clinical
modified cervix (defined as shortening and dilatation), but
with no additional specifications.31,56 Hence, the included
women could represent a lower risk population (PTB rate

is not given in Borna’s study) for PTB compared with our
study. Compared with Arikan et al., our study included
women with a lower mean gestational age and a shorter
cervical length at admission.
Recently, in a nonrandomised, retrospective study, Bom-
ba-Opon et al.32 reported a strong effect of vaginal proges-
terone in women with PTL. The study was small (190
women) and women were included if hospitalised for PTL
diagnosed as the presence of contractions and tocolysis.
Although the gestational age at delivery was similar between
groups, the authors stated that there were fewer PTB before
34 weeks of gestation in the progesterone group (22 versus
16 women). We did not observe any benefit for the preven-
tion of PTB at earlier gestational ages (i.e. <34 or <32 weeks
of gestation) and in the per protocol analysis, we found a
trend towards a higher rate of PTB <34 weeks of gestation
in the group of women on progesterone. We found also a
significantly higher rate of spontaneous preterm delivery in
the group treated with progesterone. Progesterone is known
to have an immune-modulator effect, which might enhance
the inflammatory cascade already initiated during PTL.57
Caution should be exercised regarding this finding as spon-
taneous preterm delivery was not a prespecified outcome
and numbers were small.
It can be argued that we did not use progesterone as
maintenance tocolysis because some of the women deli-
vered within the first 48 hours and were not stabilised
with acute tocolysis. Nevertheless, only nine women
delivered within the first 48 hours. To investigate this
potential bias, we performed a secondary analysis inclu-
ding only women stabilised for at least 48 hours and
obtained the same result, i.e. progesterone did not
decrease the risk of PTB.
Meta-analyses have confirmed the efficacy of various
progesterone treatments in the reduction of PTB in women
with a previous PTB.30,58–61 Based on this, the American
College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend
administering prophylactic progesterone treatment to this
high-risk group of women and strongly encourages further
randomised trials in other high-risk populations such as
women with PTL.28 However, the two largest studies per-
formed until now (Rozenberg et al. with 17P and our trial
with vaginal natural progesterone) have shown no benefit
with progesterone treatment in the prevention of PTB in
women with PTL.
Conclusion
There is no evidence that the further administration of
200 mg daily of vaginal progesterone decreases PTB or
improves neonatal outcome in women with PTL following
tocolytic therapy.
ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour
Disclosure of interests
All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure
form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on
request from the corresponding author). BMT has received
a travel grant from Besins Laboratory. All other authors
declare no other relationships or activities with companies
that might have an interest in the submitted work.
Contribution to authorship
BMT, MB and OI contributed to the design of the trial.
BMT, MB and OI wrote the grant application. BMT and
AK obtained funding for the study. All authors except
BWM participated in recruitment of participants and data
collection. BMT, VOG, MB, MCO, LK, VW, MVB and AK
analysed and interpreted the data. BMT, AK and BWM
drafted the manuscript. All authors critically reviewed the
manuscript. All authors (BMT, AK, MCO, CL, IH, DF, DS,
MH, GD, AB, SR, GLD, ES, EP, JA, FK, DN, MP, JCN, RP,
CT, RE, QT, GB, AM, BP, BWM, LK, VW, MB, VOG,
MVB, OI) except FS (who recently died) read and
approved the final manuscript before submission. BMT
accepts full responsibility for this work and acts as guaran-
tor for the study.
Details of ethics approval
In Switzerland, ethical approval for the study was given by
the independent ethics committees of the Swiss centres
with central approval in Geneva (CER:04-196 in Geneva).
In Argentina, ethical approval was obtained from a central
independent committee of ethics in clinical research (CE-
MIC), from the institutional review board of the coordinat-
ing centre CISAP/Hospital Durand (authorisation no.
0537), and from each institutional review board of the
Argentinean hospitals participating in the trial. The study
was notified to the national drug regulatory agencies
(Swissmedic and ANMAT) and conducted in accordance
with ‘Good Practice in Clinical Trials’ (GPCT) guidelines.
Registration at www.clinical-trials.gov was ensured with
identification number NCT00536003. All participants gave
written informed consent before taking part in the study.
Funding
The project was supported by grants from the University
Hospitals of Geneva (PRD-05103), the HUG Clinical
Research Center of the Swiss National Foundation (main
sponsor), Department of Reproductive Health and
Research, World Health Organization, Ministry of Health
of Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires (grant for A Karo-
linski, resolution no. 2124/2011- Investigator’s career) and
a personal scholarship for Mrs MC Ocampo (degree no.
685/10). Besins Laboratory produced and supplied the
study drugs (utrogestan and placebo) free of charge. The
9
 Martinez de Tejada et al.
funding sources did not participate in the study design,
data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report.
Acknowledgements
We thank the research nurses, research midwives and secre-
taries of our study consortium, including the residents,
nurses, midwives and gynaecologists of the participating
centres, for their help with participant recruitment and data
collection. We thank also B. Cerrutti, A. Gayet-Ageron, and
T Perneger for their help in data analysis and interpretation.
Special thanks to the members of the data safety monitoring
committee (J. Demoles, JJ Pasquier and F Goffinet) for
monitoring the trial and performing the interim analysis.
We thank Besins International, France, for the production
of study medication. We thank M. Merialdi, Department of
Reproductive Health and Research, World Health Organiza-
tion, for partial support of the implementation of the 4P
Trial in Argentina. We thank R Sudan for her editing work
of the final version of the paper.
Transparency statement
The manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent
account of the study being reported. We confirm that no
important aspects of the study have been omitted.
Data sharing
Patient-level data are available from the corresponding
author.
Appendix 1
List of participating departments and
collaborators
In Switzerland, the 4P group comprises:
1 Geneva University Hospitals and University of Geneva Faculty of Medi-
cine, Geneva (global and Swiss coordinating centre): B Martinez de Tej-
ada, O Irion, M Boulvain, M Tellenbach, V Othenin-Girard, E Vögele, R
Azbar.
2 University Hospital, University Basel, Basel: I Hösli, A Raggi, A Bir-
kenmaier, S Kann.
3 University Hospital and University of Bern, Bern: D Surbek, K Scheib-
ner, M Huguelet, E Amann, M Baumann, E Jakob.
4 Kantonales Frauenspital Chur, Chur: K Biedermann.
5 Frauenklinik Kantonspital Luzern, Lucerne: M Hodel.
6 Frauenklinik Kantonspital St Gall, St Gall: G Drack, T Fischer, K Pfau,
K Estermann.
7 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne: P Hohlfeld, S Ger-
ber, S Rouiller-Cornu, R Capoccia Brugger, A Nessi, C Rodriguez-Mail-
lot, PA Pradervand, P Bodenmann, S Fornage.
8 Frauenklinik Kantonspital Winterthur, Winterthur: E Prentl, E Amann.
9 University Hospital Zurich, Zurich: F Krähenmann, R Zimmermann.
In Argentina:
1 Centro de Investigación en Salud Poblacional –Population Health
Research Centre)/Hospital Durand, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos
Aires (CABA) (Argentinean coordinating centre): A Karolinski, MV
10
Bertolino, MC Ocampo, V Wainer, L Kanterewicz, C Rodriguez, L
Colazo.
2 Hospital Materno Infantil Ramón Sardá, CABA: C Laterra, S Ra-
mirez Almanza, E Swistak, Y González.
3 Hospital Materno Infantil de San Isidro, San Isidro, Provincia de
Buenos Aires: D Fernández, G Zalazar, M Rubino, B Sánchez, A
Rivara, C Mercado, S Sagarna.
4 Hospital Donación Francisco Santojanni, CABA: M Huespe, R
Luca, L Claus, V Castellano, L Domingo, C Castro, D Gil, ME
Rodriguez.
5 Hospital Maternidad Nuestra Señora De Las Mercedes, Tucumán: A
Bunader, NE Capua, M Romano, ME Longo, E Balbo, S Martı́nez
Lozano, C Petros.
6 Hospital Materno Infantil San Roque, Entre Rı́os: G López de De-
gani, M Coniglio, R Harris, M Leanga, R Martı́nez, F Felici, M de
Bueno, F Reffino, J Castagnola, P Brarda, ME Parra, R Montenegro,
G Fernández, G Schmadke.
7 Hospital Bernardino Rivadavia, CABA: E Seidenstein, R Pontoriero,
C González, J Alduncin.
8 Hospital Heroes de Malvinas, Provincia de Buenos Aires: J Antón,
M Damiano, G Sánchez, M Rebottaro, L Altamira, V Garbarino, C
Rebottaro.
9 Hospital Magdalena V. de Martı́nez, Provincia de Buenos Aires: D
Nowacki, M Ferrary, C Buttner, P González, Y Godoy.
10 Hospital Dr. Cosme Argerich, CABA: M Poncelas, E Bertola, L
Langdon, O Jimenez, L Mezzabota.
11 Hospital Carlos G. Durand, CABA: JC Nassif, CA Becker, JM Baier,
M Grichener, P Trotti.
12 Hospital Regional Villa Dolores, Córdoba: R Papera, M Chaloupka,
M Zárate, L Bogino, E Bertone, F Olmedo, M Barrionuevo, N Mari-
ojouls.
13 Hospital Virgen del Carmen, Provincia de Buenos Aires: C Tuma, C
Gregoris.
14 Hospital Municipal Ostaciana B. de Lavignolle, Provincia de Buenos
Aires: R Espoile, C Muzio, C Nocetto, D Carozzi, V Pelaez, C De
Moura.
15 Hospital Comunal de Tigre, Provincia de Buenos Aires: O Tiberio, M
Sagastume, L Martı́nez, D Morales.
16 Hospital J. M. Penna, CABA: G Breccia, E Aguilera, E Werbicki, S
Bover.
17 Hospital Dr. T. Alvarez, CABA: A Messina, MF Stillo, M Joao, D
Crema, L Wiliams, C Espada, V Gomariz, ME Calo.
18 Hospital Interzonal Alberto Antranik Eurnekian, Provincia de Buenos
Aires: B Peker, D Longhi, ML Pisanelli, L Giglio, J Rodrı́guez, R Perez
Petruzzelli, I Gores.
19 Hospital J. B. Iturraspe, Santa Fe: E Schinner, MV Morcillo, F
Terenzani.
20 Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, CABA: G Izbizky, ML Gimenez,
C Meller, M Grasso, M Martinotti.
21 Hospital Municipal Materno Infantil Comodoro Meisner, Provincia
de Buenos Aires; I Scheller, J Marinelli, L Carrizo, S Baro, N Marasco.
References
1 Chang HH, Larson J, Blencowe H, Spong CY, Simpson JL, Lawn JE.
Preterm births in countries with a very high human development
index—authors’ reply. Lancet 2013;381:1356–7.
2 Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ. Births: preliminary data for
2005. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2006;55:1–18.
ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists

3 Ngoc NT, Merialdi M, Abdel-Aleem H, Carroli G, Purwar M, Zavaleta
N, et al. Causes of stillbirths and early neonatal deaths: data from
7993 pregnancies in six developing countries. Bull World Health
Organ 2006;84:699–705.
4 Feresu SA, Harlow SD, Welch K, Gillespie BW. Incidence of and
socio-demographic risk factors for stillbirth, preterm birth and low
birthweight among Zimbabwean women. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol
2004;18:154–63.
5 Mercer B. Preterm premature rupture of the membranes. Obstet
Gynecol 2003;101:178–93.
6 Hack M, Taylor HG, Klein N, Eiben R, Schatschneider C,
Mercuri-Minich N. School-age outcomes in children with birth
weights under 750 g. N Engl J Med 1994;331:753–9.
7 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Kirmeyer S,
Mathews TJ, et al. Births: final data for 2009. Natl Vital Stat Rep
2011;60:1–70.
8 Murray CJ, Vos T, Lozano R, Naghavi M, Flaxman AD, Michaud
C, et al. Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and
injuries in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the
Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2012;380:2197–
223.
9 Lockwood CJ, Kuczynski E. Risk stratification and pathological
mechanisms in preterm delivery. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2001;15
(Suppl 2):78–89.
10 Romero R, Gomez R, Chaiworapongsa T, Conoscenti G, Kim JC,
Kim YM. The role of infection in preterm labour and delivery.
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2001;15(Suppl 2):41–56.
11 Lockwood CJ, Dudenhausen JW. New approaches to the prediction
of preterm delivery. J Perinat Med 1993;21:441–52.
12 Copper RL, Goldenberg RL, Davis RO, Cutter GR, DuBard MB,
Corliss DK, et al. Warning symptoms, uterine contractions, and
cervical examination findings in women at risk of preterm delivery.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 1990;162:748–54.
13 Treatment of preterm labor with the b-adrenergic agonist ritodrine.
The Canadian Preterm Labor Investigators Group. N Engl J Med
1992;327:308–12.
14 King JF, Grant A, Keirse MJ, Chalmers I. Beta-mimetics in preterm
labour: an overview of the randomized controlled trials. BJOG
1988;95:211–22.
15 Romero R, Sibai BM, Sanchez-Ramos L, Valenzuela GJ, Veille JC,
Tabor B, et al. An oxytocin receptor antagonist (atosiban) in the
treatment of preterm labor: a randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial with tocolytic rescue. Am J Obstet Gynecol
2000;182:1173–83.
16 Niebyl JR, Blake DA, White RD, Kumor KM, Dubin NH, Robinson JC,
et al. The inhibition of premature labor with indomethacin. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 1980;136:1014–19.
17 Ferguson JE II, Dyson DC, Schutz T, Stevenson DK. A comparison of
tocolysis with nifedipine or ritodrine: analysis of efficacy and
maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol
1990;163:105–11.
18 Keirse MJ. The history of tocolysis. BJOG 2003;110(Suppl 20):
94–7.
19 Roos C, Spaanderman ME, Schuit E, Bloemenkamp KW, Bolte AC,
Cornette J, et al. Effect of maintenance tocolysis with nifedipine in
threatened preterm labor on perinatal outcomes: a randomized
controlled trial. JAMA 2013;309:41–7.
20 Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Dare MR, Middleton P. Oral b-mimetics for
maintenance therapy after threatened preterm labour. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev 2006:CD003927.
21 Han S, Crowther CA, Moore V. Magnesium maintenance therapy
for preventing preterm birth after threatened preterm labour.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010:CD000940.
ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
Vaginal progesterone in women with preterm labour
22 Papatsonis D, Flenady V, Liley H. Maintenance therapy with oxytocin
antagonists for inhibiting preterm birth after threatened preterm
labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009:CD005938.
23 Meis PJ, Klebanoff M, Thom E, Dombrowski MP, Sibai B,
Moawad AH, et al. Prevention of recurrent preterm delivery by 17
a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. N Engl J Med 2003;348:2379–
85.
24 da Fonseca EB, Bittar RE, Carvalho MH, Zugaib M. Prophylactic
administration of progesterone by vaginal suppository to reduce the
incidence of spontaneous preterm birth in women at increased risk:
a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind study. Am J Obstet
Gynecol 2003;188:419–24.
25 Preterm birth: what can be done? Lancet 2008;371:2.
26 Chandiramani M, Di Renzo GC, Gottschalk E, Helmer H, Henrich W,
Hoesli I, et al. Fetal fibronectin as a predictor of spontaneous
preterm birth: a European perspective. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
2011;24:330–6.
27 Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Publications Committee, with
assistance of Vincenzo Berghella. Progesterone and preterm birth
prevention: translating clinical trials data into clinical practice. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:376–86.
28 Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics, The American College
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice bulletin no. 130:
prediction and prevention of preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol
2012;120:954–73.
29 Su LL, Samuel M, Chong YS. Progestational agents for treating
threatened or established preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst
Rev 2010:CD006770.
30 Dodd JM, Jones L, Flenady V, Cincotta R, Crowther CA. Prenatal
administration of progesterone for preventing preterm birth in
women considered to be at risk of preterm birth. Cochrane
Database Syst Rev 2013;7:CD004947.
31 Borna S, Sahabi N. Progesterone for maintenance tocolytic therapy
after threatened preterm labour: a randomised controlled trial. Aust
N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2008;48:58–63.
32 Bomba-Opon DA, Kosinska-Kaczynska K, Kosinski P, Wegrzyn P,
Kaczynski B, Wielgos M. Vaginal progesterone after tocolytic
therapy in threatened preterm labor. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
2012;25:1156–9.
33 Facchinetti F, Dante G, Venturini P, Paganelli S, Volpe A.
17a-hydroxy-progesterone effects on cervical proinflammatory
agents in women at risk for preterm delivery. Am J Perinatol
2008;25:503–6.
34 Facchinetti F, Paganelli S, Comitini G, Dante G, Volpe A. Cervical
length changes during preterm cervical ripening: effects of
17-a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate. Am J Obstet Gynecol
2007;196:453.e451–4; discussion 421.
35 Rozenberg P, Chauveaud A, Deruelle P, Capelle M, Winer N,
Desbriere R, et al. Prevention of preterm delivery after successful
tocolysis in preterm labor by 17 a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate: a
randomized controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol
2012;206:206.e201–9.
36 Leitich H, Brunbauer M, Kaider A, Egarter C, Husslein P. Cervical
length and dilatation of the internal cervical os detected by vaginal
ultrasonography as markers for preterm delivery: a systematic
review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999;181:1465–72.
37 Hoesli I, Tercanli S, Holzgreve W. Cervical length assessment by
ultrasound as a predictor of preterm labour—is there a role for
routine screening? BJOG 2003;110(Suppl 20):61–5.
38 Hoesli IM, Strutas D, Tercanli S, Holzgreve W. Charts for cervical
length in singleton pregnancy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2003;82:161–5.
39 Volumenie JL, Luton D, De Spirlet M, Sibony O, Blot P, Oury JF.
Ultrasonographic cervical length measurement is not a better
11
 Martinez de Tejada et al.
predictor of preterm delivery than digital examination in a
population of patients with idiopathic preterm labor. Eur J Obstet
Gynecol Reprod Biol 2004;117:33–7.
40 Leitich H, Kaider A. Fetal fibronectin—how useful is it in the
prediction of preterm birth? BJOG 2003;110(Suppl 20):66–70.
41 Honest H, Bachmann LM, Gupta JK, Kleijnen J, Khan KS. Accuracy
of cervicovaginal fetal fibronectin test in predicting risk of
spontaneous preterm birth: systematic review. BMJ 2002;325:301.
42 Plaut MM, Smith W, Kennedy K. Fetal fibronectin: the impact of a
rapid test on the treatment of women with preterm labor symptoms.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1588–93; discussion 1593–5.
43 Largo RH, Pfister D, Molinari L, Kundu S, Lipp A, Duc G.
Significance of prenatal, perinatal and postnatal factors in the
development of AGA preterm infants at five to seven years. Dev
Med Child Neurol 1989;31:440–56.
44 Simhan HN, Caritis SN. Prevention of preterm delivery. N Engl J Med
2007;357:477–87.
45 Lan KKG, DeMets DL. Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical
trials. Biometrika 1983;70:659–63.
46 Romero R, Nicolaides K, Conde-Agudelo A, Tabor A, O’Brien JM,
Cetingoz E, et al. Vaginal progesterone in women with an
asymptomatic sonographic short cervix in the midtrimester decreases
preterm delivery and neonatal morbidity: a systematic review and
metaanalysis of individual patient data. Am J Obstet Gynecol
2012;206:124.e1–19.
47 Berghella V. Universal cervical length screening for prediction
and prevention of preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2012;67:
653–8.
48 Owen J, Szychowski JM, Hankins G, Iams JD, Sheffield JS,
Perez-Delboy A, et al. Does midtrimester cervical length >/=25 mm
predict preterm birth in high-risk women? Am J Obstet Gynecol
2010;203:393.e391–5.
49 Combs CA. Vaginal progesterone for asymptomatic cervical
shortening and the case for universal screening of cervical length.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:101–3.
50 Mateus J. Clinical management of the short cervix. Obstet Gynecol
Clin North Am 2011;38:367–85.
12
51 Di Renzo GC, Mattei A, Gojnic M, Gerli S. Progesterone and
pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2005;17:598–600.
52 Baumbach J, Shi S-Q, Shi L, Balducci J, Coonrod DV, Garfield RE.
Inhibition of uterine contractility with various tocolytics with and
without progesterone: in vitro studies. Am J Obst Gynecol
2012;206:254.e251–5.
53 Erny R, Pigne A, Prouvost C, Gamerre M, Malet C, Serment H, et al.
The effects of oral administration of progesterone for premature
labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1986;154:525–9.
54 Tan PC, King AS, Vallikkannu N, Omar SZ. Single dose 17
a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate in preterm labor: a randomized
trial. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;285:585–90.
55 Noblot G, Audra P, Dargent D, Faguer B, Mellier G. The use of
micronized progesterone in the treatment of menace of preterm
delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1991;40:203–9.
56 Arikan I, Barut A, Harma M, Harma IM. Effect of progesterone as a
tocolytic and in maintenance therapy during preterm labor. Gynecol
Obstet Invest 2011;72:269–73.
57 Schumacher A, Costa SD, Zenclussen AC. Endocrine factors
modulating immune responses in pregnancy. Front Immunol
2014;5:196.
58 Mackenzie R, Walker M, Armson A, Hannah ME. Progesterone for
the prevention of preterm birth among women at increased risk: a
systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006;194:1234–42.
59 Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Cincotta R, Flenady V, Robinson JS.
Progesterone supplementation for preventing preterm birth: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
2005;84:526–33.
60 Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM, Delke I. Progestational agents to
prevent preterm birth: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled
trials. Obstet Gynecol 2005;105:273–9.
61 Dodd JM, Flenady V, Cincotta R, Crowther CA. Prenatal
administration of progesterone for preventing preterm birth.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006:CD004947.
ª 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists