Usefulness of atosiban for tocolysis during external cephalic version: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract Introduction Breech/transverse presentation is responsible for about 30–50 % of cesarean sections in the world. Cesarean section carries a five-fold greater morbidity than vaginal delivery, deeply impacting on women’s health. External Cephalic Version (ECV) is an external manipulation used to convert a non-cephalic to a cephalic presentation. The use of tocolysis might facilitate this procedure; however, it is still controversial which drug should be considered as first choice. Objective To assess the effectiveness of tocolysis with atosiban, a competitive oxytocin receptor antagonist, in order to increase the rate of successful ECV. Study design Nine databases (including MEDLINE, CINAHL, LILACS, EMBASE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Scielo, PROSPERO, Cochrane at CENTRAL) were searched from the inception to August 2020 using a combination of MeSH terms and keywords regarding “atosiban” and “external cephalic version”. We included trials of women with a singleton pregnancy who reached at least 36 weeks of gestation and were scheduled to ECV and tocolysis with atosiban (intervention group) compared to beta-agonists or other drugs (control group). The primary outcome was the incidence of successful ECV. Summary measures were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI). Data collection and analysis Four studies (1534 women) were eligible for analysis. ECV success rate was significantly lower in women randomized to atosiban (36.7 % vs 45.3 %; RR 0.78 [95 % CI 0.6 to 0.98]). Cesarean section and vaginal delivery rates did not differ between intervention and control group ((59.8 % vs 52.6 %; RR 1.17 [0.98–1.38] and (38.6 % vs 45.0 %; RR 0.83 [95 % CI 0.69–1.01] respectively). Cephalic (36.9 % vs 44.6 %; RR 0.81 [95 % CI 0.65 to 1.01], or breech/transverse presentation at labor (63.4 % vs 55.1 %; RR 1.18 [95 % CI 0.99–1.40]), APGAR score less than 7 at 5 min (1.6 % vs 2.0 %; RR 1.14 [95 % CI 0.27–4.73], NICU admissions (44.2 % vs 48.1 %; RR 0.92 [95 % CI 0.58–1.46] and Umbilical cord pH were similar in both groups. Drug-related side effects were lower in women randomized to atosiban, compared with control group (16.0 % vs 42.9 %; RR 0.38 [95 % CI 0.31 to 0.47]. Conclusion The use of atosiban for tocolysis does not improve the rate of successful ECVs when compared to beta-agonists. However, atosiban was associated with a significantly lower incidence of side effects and comparable cesarean section rates.