Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Dec 6;16(12):e1002988.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002988. eCollection 2019 Dec.

Antenatal magnesium sulphate and adverse neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Antenatal magnesium sulphate and adverse neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Emily Shepherd et al. PLoS Med. .

Abstract

Background: There is widespread, increasing use of magnesium sulphate in obstetric practice for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, and preterm fetal neuroprotection; benefit for preventing preterm labour and birth (tocolysis) is unproven. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether antenatal magnesium sulphate is associated with unintended adverse neonatal outcomes.

Methods and findings: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, LILACS, MEDLINE, Embase, TOXLINE, and Web of Science, were searched (inceptions to 3 September 2019). Randomised, quasi-randomised, and non-randomised trials, cohort and case-control studies, and case reports assessing antenatal magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, fetal neuroprotection, or tocolysis, compared with placebo/no treatment or a different magnesium sulphate regimen, were included. The primary outcome was perinatal death. Secondary outcomes included pre-specified and non-pre-specified adverse neonatal outcomes. Two reviewers screened 5,890 articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias following Cochrane Handbook and RTI Item Bank guidance. For randomised trials, pooled risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated using fixed- or random-effects meta-analysis. Non-randomised data were tabulated and narratively summarised. We included 197 studies (40 randomised trials, 138 non-randomised studies, and 19 case reports), of mixed quality. The 40 trials (randomising 19,265 women and their babies) were conducted from 1987 to 2018 across high- (16 trials) and low/middle-income countries (23 trials) (1 mixed). Indications included pre-eclampsia/eclampsia (24 trials), fetal neuroprotection (7 trials), and tocolysis (9 trials); 18 trials compared magnesium sulphate with placebo/no treatment, and 22 compared different regimens. For perinatal death, no clear difference in randomised trials was observed between magnesium sulphate and placebo/no treatment (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.10; 8 trials, 13,654 babies), nor between regimens. Eleven of 138 non-randomised studies reported on perinatal death. Only 1 cohort (127 babies; moderate to high risk of bias) observed an increased risk of perinatal death with >48 versus ≤48 grams magnesium sulphate exposure for tocolysis. No clear secondary adverse neonatal outcomes were observed in randomised trials, and a very limited number of possible adverse outcomes warranting further consideration were identified in non-randomised studies. Where non-randomised studies observed possible harms, often no or few confounders were controlled for (moderate to high risk of bias), samples were small (200 babies or fewer), and/or results were from subgroup analyses. Limitations include missing data for important outcomes across most studies, heterogeneity of included studies, and inclusion of published data only.

Conclusions: Our findings do not support clear associations between antenatal magnesium sulphate for beneficial indications and adverse neonatal outcomes. Further large, high-quality studies (prospective cohorts or individual participant data meta-analyses) assessing specific outcomes, or the impact of regimen, pregnancy, or birth characteristics on these outcomes, would further inform safety recommendations. PROSPERO: CRD42013004451.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow diagram of included studies.
Flow diagram showing the flow of records through the different phases of the review, indicating the number of records identified, included and excluded, and the reasons for exclusions.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Risk of bias for randomised controlled trials.
Risk of bias graph showing judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across the 40 included randomised trials.

References

    1. Duley L, Gülmezoglu AM, Henderson‐Smart DJ, Chou D. Magnesium sulphate and other anticonvulsants for women with pre‐eclampsia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(11):CD000025 10.1002/14651858.CD000025.pub2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duley L, Matar HE, Almerie MQ, Hall DR. Alternative magnesium sulphate regimens for women with pre‐eclampsia and eclampsia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(8):CD007388 10.1002/14651858.CD007388.pub2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for prevention and treatment of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011. - PubMed
    1. Doyle LW, Crowther CA, Middleton P, Marret S, Rouse D. Magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(1):CD004661 10.1002/14651858.CD004661.pub3 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jayaram PM, Mohan MK, Farid I, Lindow S. Antenatal magnesium sulfate for fetal neuroprotection: a critical appraisal and systematic review of clinical practice guidelines. J Perinat Med. 2019;47(3):262–9. 10.1515/jpm-2018-0174 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances