Skip to main content
Download PDF

Comparison of the efficacy of nifedipine with ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth volume 24, Article number: 318 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Some studies have compared the efficacy of nifedipine with that of other tocolytic drugs in the treatment of preterm labor, but the reported results are conflicting.

Objective

To compare the efficacy of nifedipine with that of ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor.

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Clarivate Analytics Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched until April 3,2024 using predefined keywords. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical trials that compared the efficacy of nifedipine with that of ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor were included. Two authors independently reviewed the articles, assessed their quality and extracted the data. The quality of the included RCTs based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 1 for clinical trial studies. The risk difference (RD) with the associated 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. A forest plot diagram was used to show the comparative point estimates of nifedipine and other tocolytic drugs on the prevention of preterm labor and their associated 95% confidence intervals based on the duration of pregnancy prolongation. Study heterogeneity was evaluated by the I2 index, and publication bias was evaluated by Egger’s test.

Results

Forty studies enrolling 4336 women were included. According to our meta-analysis, there was a significant difference in the prolongation of preterm labor within the first 48 h between the nifedipine group and the nitroglycerine group (RD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.08 to -0.00; I2: 32.3%). Additionally, there were significant differences between nifedipine and ritodrine (RD, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.21; I2, 51.2%) for more than one week RD, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.19; I2, 33.2%) and for 34 weeks and more. The difference between nifedipine and magnesium sulfate was not significant in any of the four time points.

Conclusions

Considering the superiority of nifedipine over ritodrine and nitroglycerine and its similar efficacy to magnesium sulfate for tocolysis, it seems that the side effects of these options determine the first drug line.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Preterm birth is a major global health problem, is the leading cause of neonatal mortality and is one of the primary causes of long-term neonatal morbidity, which poses a substantial economic burden [1]. The prevalence of preterm labor ranges from 5 to 18% worldwide. During the last 20 years, its prevalence has increased, which seems to be related to several risk factors, including advanced maternal age and the use of assisted reproductive methods [2,3,4]. Strategies to decrease preterm birth include risk assessment, objective evaluation of threatened preterm labor, evidence-based interventions, and reduction of iatrogenic prematurity [5]. A number of therapeutic options for the prevention of preterm labor are being investigated [6].

Since uterine contractions are most commonly recognized as a precursor to preterm birth, the use of therapeutic interventions to stop uterine contractions was the first choice. Therefore, many drugs, including magnesium sulfate, calcium channel blockers, oxytocin antagonists, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and beta-adrenergic receptor agonists, have been used to inhibit myometrial contractions [7]. After diagnosing preterm labor, clinicians can choose from a range of tocolytic drugs to delay labor. This allows time for the administration of corticosteroids to mature fetal lungs, which can reduce neonatal morbidity and mortality [8].

Knowledge of the safety and effectiveness of these medications is paramount [9]. A considerable number of studies have been carried out to compare nifedipine with other tocolytics (ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate). Ritodrine hydrochloride is the only FDA-approved drug for preterm labor [10]; compared with nifedipine, it has not shown significant differences in efficacy in some studies [11,12,13], while other reports have shown that nifedipine is more effective than ritodrine as a tocolytic agent for preterm labor [14,15,16]. However, few studies have reported that ritodrine has a better effect on the cessation of uterine contractions [17, 18]. The results from the comparison of nifedipine with nitroglycerine [19, 20] or magnesium sulfate [21, 22] have also been controversial. In terms of side effects, although most studies have reported that nifedipine is safe [23, 24], the results for the other three tocolytics are conflicting.

Due to the high prevalence of preterm delivery and the conflicting results regarding the efficacy of medication, the present study aimed to compare the efficacy of nifedipine with ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

The methodology and reporting of this systematic review were based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and checklist [25]. The protocol for this review was registered at PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews with registration (Supplementary file, S1).

Search strategy

Systematic searches for published articles until April 3, 2024, were performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Clarivate Analytics Web of Science and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of tocolytic drug interventions for preterm labor. We used the combination of MeSH and keywords in our search strategy, including “Nifedipine” with “Nitroglycerin” OR “Ritodrine” OR Nitroglycerin OR Magnesium Sulfate AND prolongation of pregnancy AND Randomized controlled trials OR clinical trials (the complete search strategy is provided in the Supplementary File 2). Our search was conducted without time and language limitations, and to ensure a comprehensive literature search, we checked all related reference lists of the included articles and meta-analyses for additional studies.

Inclusion criteria

Studies were selected if they (1) were RCTs or clinical trials; (2) were all pregnant women with preterm labor; (3) had a gestational age younger than 37 weeks; (4) had intact membranes; (3) compared the effect of tocolytic drugs (ritodrine, nitroglycerin or magnesium sulfate) with that of nifedipine on the prolongation of pregnancy; (4) provided sufficient information on the prolongation of pregnancy, including the frequency and percentage, reported at the end of the interventions in each group. The PICOS criteria (interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design) are provided in Supplementary File S3.

Exclusion criteria

Studies were excluded if they (1) reported membrane rupture, (2) compared nifedipine with multiple tocolytic drugs, (3) did not report favourable outcomes in the intervention groups, or (4) were animal studies, observational studies, editorials, letters, or reviews.

Screening and data extraction

Two independent review authors (M.Z. and R.A.) initially screened the retrieved titles and abstracts using a standardized Excel data abstraction form and then assessed the full texts of the selected studies for potential eligibility. EndNote software was used to export all the retrieved articles. Duplicates were removed, and multiple reports for the same trial were linked together as one study. Two review authors (M.Z. and R.A.) independently extracted data on the study design, baseline characteristics of the enrolled patients, risk of bias domains, and study outcomes, as well as the frequency and percentage of the main outcome (prolongation of pregnancy). In articles with insufficient data, we emailed the corresponding author twice at two-week intervals to obtain additional information.

Any disagreements were resolved through discussion and based on the opinion of a third researcher (E.A.). The following data were extracted from the study: first author’s name, year of publication, study location, intervention type, study design, characteristics of enrolled participants (numbers, mean age, gestational age), duration of prolongation of pregnancy (within 48 h, between 48 h and 7 days, more than 7 days, 34 weeks and more), and outcomes reported as frequency and percent.

Risk of bias assessment

We evaluated the quality of the included RCTs based on the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 1 (ROB 1) for clinical trial studies [26]. Two independent authors (M.Z. and R.A.) assessed each article’s quality according to the seven items of ROB 1: (1) random sequence generation, (2) allocation concealment, (3) selective outcome reporting, (4) blinding of participants and personnel, (5) detection bias (blinding of evaluators), (6) incomplete outcome data, and (7) other probable sources of biases. For each study, a label of bias was defined (low risk, high risk, or unclear risk of bias) (Supplementary file, S4).

Statistical analysis

Comparative point estimates (risk differences: RD) with 95% confidence intervals of the effects of tocolytic drugs versus nifedipine treatment on the prevention of preterm labor were extracted from all studies. Then, a forest plot diagram was used to show the results of each study as well as heterogeneity between studies. To estimate the pooled effect, assuming that the extracted articles were a random sample of the total population under study, a random effect model was used. Funnel plot diagrams and Egger’s regression asymmetry test were used to assess publication bias. Finally, sensitivity analysis was used to determine the impact of specific studies on the overall impact estimate. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata software, version 16.0 (Stata Corp. 2019. Stata Statistical Software: Release 16. College Station, TX: Stata Corp LLC), and a significance level of 0.05 was used.

Results

Study selection

After the initial search of all the databases, a total of 2162 articles were retrieved. Of those, 635 duplicate documents were excluded. The whole search process is shown in the PRISMA flow diagram in Fig. 1. After screening the remaining 100 titles and abstracts, we considered 72 articles for further evaluation of the full texts. We excluded 32 studies because 8 studies included preterm labor with membrane rupture or because they did not separate intact from ruptured membranes and reported mixed data; 19 studies did not include relevant data, and 5 studies used multiple tocolytic drugs. Finally, 40 favourable trials were included in the pooled analysis [14, 16, 17, 19, 22, 27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61].

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flow diagram describing the study design process

Full size image

Study characteristics

The features of the 40 trials included in the present study are indicated in Table 1 [14, 16, 17, 19, 22, 27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61]. The trials were published between 1991 and 2023. The total number of participants ranged between 42 and 200, with a total sample size of 4336 participants. The sample sizes of the studies that compared nifedipine and nitroglycerin were 1791 participants, 902 for nifedipine and ritodrine, and 1643 for nifedipine and magnesium sulfate. The minimum age of the participants was 16 years, the maximum age was 42 years, and the gestational age ranged between 20 and 37 weeks.

Table 1 Characteristics of the included trials comparing the efficacy of nifedipine with that of ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor
Full size table

Meta-analysis

According to our meta-analysis (Fig. 2), which examined the status of preterm labor within the first 48 h, which included 21 studies, preterm labor was significantly lower in the nifedipine group than in the other tocolytic drug group (RD, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.10 to -0.01; I2: 73.2%). Subgroup analysis revealed that this difference was due to a significant difference between nifedipine and nitroglycerine (RD, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.08 to -0.00; I2: 32.3%).

Fig. 2
figure 2

Comparing the efficacy of nifedipine with other tocolytic drugs in prolongation of pregnancy within 48 h

Full size image

The pooled analysis (Fig. 3), which examined the status of preterm labor within 48 h to a week, included nineteen studies, analysis showed that the rate of prolonged preterm delivery was similar between nifedipine and other tocolytic drugs (RD, -0.00, 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.05; I2: 67.6%).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Comparing the efficacy of nifedipine with other tocolytic drugs in prolongation of pregnancy labor within 48 h to a week

Full size image

According to our meta-analysis (Fig. 4), which examined the status of preterm labor for more than one week and included twenty-nine studies, the prolongation of preterm delivery was 5% greater for patients receiving nifedipine than for those receiving other tocolytic drugs (RD, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.10; I2: 53.3%). Subgroup analysis revealed that this difference was due to differences between nifedipine and ritodrine (RD: 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.21; I2:51.3%).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Comparing the efficacy of nifedipine with other tocolytic drugs in prolongation of pregnancy labor for more than 1 week

Full size image

According to the pooled analysis (Fig. 5), which examined the status of preterm labor for 34 weeks or more, which included eleven studies, subgroup analysis revealed that the rate of prolonged preterm delivery was significantly greater (11%) for nifedipine than for ritodrine (RD: 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.19; I2:33.2%).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Comparing the efficacy of nifedipine with other tocolytic drugs in prolongation of pregnancy labor for 34 weeks and more

Full size image

Subgroup analysis based on low risk of bias studies revealed that the difference in the rate of prolonged preterm delivery between patients receiving nifedipine and patients receiving magnesium sulfate or nitroglycerine was not statistically significant across all four time points. However, the rate of prolonged preterm delivery was approximately 14% greater for nifedipine than for ritodrine in two time periods, “more than 1 week” and “34 weeks and more”, which was a statistically significant difference (supplementary file, S9-S12).

Publication bias and influence tests

In all the meta-analyses, the funnel plots showed no publication bias, which was also confirmed by Egger’s test (p > 0.05) (Supplementary File, S5-S8). The sensitivity tests by leave-one-out meta-analysis indicated that all single-study omitted estimates lay within the 95% CI of the respective overall effect. This suggested that the pooled effect was not substantially influenced by any single study.

Discussion

This study examined the efficacy of nifedipine in comparison with ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Although tocolytics were introduced as the best way to suppress preterm labor many years ago, obstetricians are still not sure which tocolytic agent is the best available option [62].

The results of the present study showed that tocolysis with nifedipine is associated with lower preterm birth than that associated with other drugs within the first 48 h after the start of contractions. This result was due to a significant difference between nifedipine and nitroglycerine. As mentioned, tocolytic agents should be able to postpone pregnancy for at least 48 h to provide adequate time to administer antenatal corticosteroids, which would help boost the maturity of the fetal lung and prevent respiratory distress syndrome in the newborn [63, 64].

In contrast with the findings of this study, Conde-Agudelo et al., in a published meta-analysis in 2013, reported that there were no significant differences between oral nifedipine and transdermal GTN in terms of pregnancy prolongation and delivery within 48 h of treatment [65]. In a systematic review that included several studies in the present review, Flenady et al. (2014) reported that in comparison with other tocolytics (including betamimetics, nitroglycerin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), magnesium sulfate and oxytocin receptor antagonists (ORAs)), calcium channel blockers (mainly nifedipine) did not result in a significant reduction in preterm birth. However, since the findings of the present meta-analysis include more recent studies, the resulting evidence seems to be more reliable [66].

On the other hand, the analysis of studies on the efficacy of tocolytics in delaying childbirth for 48 h to one week revealed that nifedipine is not more effective than other tocolytics. Similarly, a Cochrane review on the efficacy of nifedipine compared to other tocolytics in inhibiting preterm birth in 2014 showed that there was no significant evidence that nitric oxide donors were more successful than nifedipine in prolonging pregnancy beyond 48 h [67].

However, in contrast, Conde-Agudelo et al. (2011), in a published systematic review and meta-analysis of twenty-six trials and 2179 women, reported that nifedipine was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of delivery within 7 days of initiation of treatment and before 34 weeks gestation compared with β2-adrenergic receptor agonists. Similarly, there was also no difference between nifedipine and magnesium sulfate in terms of tocolysis efficacy in this study [68].

Conversely, the results of two previous systematic reviews by Oei and Tsatsaris in 1999 and 2001 showed that nifedipine was more effective at delaying labor beyond 48 h than ritodrine, which reflects the changes in evidence from recent studies [69, 70].

In contrast, in the included studies that examined the status of preterm labor for more than a week, the prolongation of pregnancy rate was 11% greater in the nifedipine group than in the ritodrine group. On the other hand, the results showed that nifedipine was 11% more effective at reducing the risk of delivery before 34 weeks than ritodrine, which was a statistically significant difference. This suggests that the long-term efficacy of nifedipine on preventing preterm birth is greater than that of ritodrine.

Similarly, a Cochrane review of 12 randomized controlled trials from 2003 involving a total of 1029 women showed that nifedipine is more effective than ritodrine in prolonging pregnancy beyond 7 days and is much less likely to cause maternal side effects [71].

Generally, although some studies have recommended nifedipine as the first-line tocolytic therapy, our study revealed no difference among nifedipine, nitroglycerin and ritodrine in delaying preterm labor for the first week. However, it was more effective than magnesium sulfate, only delaying labor for 48 h. However, the difference in the effect of these two drugs did not reach a significant level after analysing only the studies with a low risk of bias. In addition, the long-term tocolytic effects of nifedipine for postponing preterm birth for more than one week were not different from those of nitroglycerine or magnesium sulfate. A meta-analysis of studies with a low risk of bias confirmed the same findings and only showed the superiority of nifedipine over ritodrine in delaying birth for more than one week or more than 34 weeks. Therefore, the maternal and neonatal side effects of these three drugs can determine the first choice for tocolytic therapy.

In the present study, it was not possible to analyse the side effects of these drugs due to the extent of the mentioned side effects and the lack of uniformity in how they are reported. In this regard, the results of many studies have shown that the risk of pulmonary edema, a serious maternal side effect, is greater for beta-mimetic drugs and magnesium sulfate than for nifedipine. The next issue is that many of the neonatal complications mentioned in the studies can be due to the premature nature of the newborn and not the complications of the drugs. However, according to some studies, the risk of dangerous neonatal complications such as necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) is lower with nifedipine [68, 72].

Strengths and limitations

The present study has several strengths. An extensive literature search was conducted using different databases, and as a result, many existing studies were included in this analysis. In addition, the use of subgroup analysis to reduce the heterogeneity of findings was another strength of this study. In addition, the quality of the articles was assessed, and the analysis was performed on all the studies as well as on the studies with a low risk of bias. In addition, the results of the relevant tests were not biased.

In addition, some limitations in the present study should be considered. First, the heterogeneity was high, so the subgroup analysis was performed based on the duration of delivery delay and the risk of bias in the studies. Second, the criteria used for preterm labor differed based on uterine contractions and cervical changes. The dosage of drugs and the duration of treatment were also different among the included studies. Finally, since the aim of this study was to review all the evidence, the limitation of maternal age was not applied to the selection of studies.

Further studies are recommended to compare the effectiveness of different doses of tocolytic drugs with fewer side effects on maternal and foetal outcomes. In addition, higher-quality, blinded trial studies that demonstrate maternal safety and offspring short- and long-term outcomes of tocolytics are also recommended.

Conclusions

In general, the results of the present study showed that nifedipine is more effective than magnesium sulfate in postponing preterm labor within 48 h. However, this drug was equally effective in postponing preterm birth compared to other tocolytics, including nitroglycerin and ritodrine, during this period. On the other hand, the efficacy of nifedipine was not different from other tocolytics for delaying labor between 48 h and one week. However, based on the findings of this meta-analysis, the effectiveness of nifedipine for long-term prevention of preterm birth for more than one week and more than 34 weeks was greater than ritodrine but equal to magnesium sulfate and nitroglycerin.

Data availability

The supplementary material is available. The dataset used in this study is available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  1. Hosny AEMS, Fakhry MN, El-Khayat W, Kashef MT. Risk factors associated with preterm labor, with special emphasis on preterm premature rupture of membranes and severe preterm labor. J Chin Med Assoc. 2020;83:280–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Vogel JP, Chawanpaiboon S, Moller AB, Watananirun K, Bonet M, Lumbiganon P. The global epidemiology of preterm birth. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;52:3–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Purisch SE, Gyamfi-Bannerman C. Epidemiology of preterm birth. Semin Perinatol. 2017;41:387–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tuji TS, Wake AD, Adere GB, Wedajo AB, Obole BD, Jenka DT, Gebriye ST. Magnitude of spontaneous preterm birth and its associated factors among preterm birth in NICU wards in Asella Teaching and Referral Hospital, Asella, Oromia, Ethiopia. J Int Med Res. 2021;49:3000605211034693.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Govindaswami B, Jegatheesan P, Nudelman M, Narasimhan SR. Prevention of Prematurity: advances and opportunities. Clin Perinatol. 2018;45:579–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Triggs T, Kumar S, Mitchell M. Experimental drugs for the inhibition of preterm labor. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2020;:507–23.

  7. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics. Practice Bulletin No. 171: Management of Preterm Labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128:e155-64.

  8. Morhart P, Gärtner J, Weiss C, Stumpfe FM, Dammer U, Faschingbauer F, Fahlbusch FB, Beckmann MW, Kehl S. Influence of Timing of Antenatal Corticosteroid Administration on Morbidity of Preterm neonates. Vivo. 2022;36:1777–84.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Navathe R, Berghella V. Tocolysis for Acute Preterm Labor: where have we been, where are we now, and where are we going? Am J Perinatol. 2016;33:229–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cunningham FG. Williams Obstetrics. 25th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ferguson JE, 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mousa AAA, Mohamed MA, Radwan MS, El Sayed KF. A comparative study between Nifedipine, Ritodrine and Magnesium Sulfate as Tocolytics in cases of Preterm Labor and their effect on Utero placental perfusion. Egypt J Hosp Med. 2019;75:2878–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Van De Water M, Kessel ET, De Kleine MJ, Oei SG. Tocolytic effectiveness of nifedipine versus ritodrine and follow-up of newborns: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2008;87:340–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Maitra N, Christian V, Kavishvar A. Tocolytic efficacy of nifedipine versus ritodrine in preterm labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;97:147–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ali M, Hussain MA, Qaisrani HG, Chohan MA. To compare the efficacy of beta agonist ritodrine and calcium channel blocker nifedipine in the management of preterm labour. Pakistan J Med Health Sci. 2013;7:1167–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Al-Qattan F, Omu AE, Labeeb L. A prospective randomized study comparing nifedipine versus ritodrine for the suppression of preterm labour. Med Principles Pract. 2000;9:164–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cararach V, Palacio M, Martínez S, Deulofeu P, Sánchez M, Cobo T, Coll O. Nifedipine versus Ritodrine for suppression of preterm labor. Comparison of their efficacy and secondary effects. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006;127:204–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Levin G, Ezra Y, Weill Y, Kabiri D, Pollack RN, Rottenstreich A. Nifedipine versus Ritodrine during external cephalic version procedure: a case control study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2021;34:3008–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jamil M, Abid R, Basharat A. Transdermal nitro-glycerine Versus oral nifedipine for Acute Tocolysis in Preterm Labour: a randomized controlled trial. J Soc Obstetricians Gynaecologists Pakistan. 2020;10:26–9.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Amorim MM, Lippo LA, Costa AA, Coutinho IC, Souza AS. Nitroglicerina transdérmica versus Nifedipina oral para inibição do trabalho de parto prematuro: ensaio clínico randomizado [Transdermal nitroglycerin versus oral nifedipine administration for tocolysis: a randomized clinical trial]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2009;31:552–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Salman S, Habib D, Atef M, Abbas A. The effect of oral Nifedipine versus Parenteral Magnesium Sulfate and Ritodrine for Tocolysis in patients with threatened Preterm Labor: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Open J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;9:1142–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Klauser CK, Briery CM, Tucker AR, Martin RW, Magann EF, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC. Tocolysis in women with advanced preterm labor: a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:696–700.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kamel H, HosamEldin N, Soltan M. Comparative study between the Effect of Nifedipine, Ritodrine and Magnesium Sulfate Therapy on Doppler indices of fetal umbilical and middle cerebral arteries in patients with Preterm Labour. Egypt J Hosp Med. 2019;74:364–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Houtzager BA, Hogendoorn SM, Papatsonis DN, Samsom JF, van Geijn HP, Bleker OP, van Wassenaer AG. Long-term follow up of children exposed in utero to nifedipine or ritodrine for the management of preterm labour. BJOG. 2006;113:324–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;15:264–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Jüni P, Moher D, Oxman AD, Savovic J, Schulz KF, Weeks L, Sterne JA, Cochrane Bias Methods Group; Cochrane Statistical Methods Group. The Cochrane collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Balasubramani SR, Kamatchi K. Transdermal nitroglycerin versus oral nifedipine administration for tocolysis in preterm labour. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2017;6:3967–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Baykal BÖ, Avcıoğlu SN. Comparison of effects of nifedipine and ritodrine on maternal and fetal blood flow patterns in preterm labor. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc. 2015;16:80–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Bracero LA, Leikin E, Kirshenbaum N, Tejani N. Comparison of nifedipine and ritodrine for the treatment of preterm labor. Am J Perinatol. 1991;8:365–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ceyhan ST, Güngör S, Göktolga U, Keskin U, Ergün A, Baþer I. Erken doğumun önlenmesinde nifedipin ve ritodrinin karşılaştırılması. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi. 2007;49:87–90.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Dhawle A, Kalra J, Bagga R, Aggarwal N. Nifedipine versus nitroglycerin for acute tocolysis in preterm labour: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2:61–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Faraji R, Asgharnia M, Dalil Heirati F, Nemati F. A comparison between Magnesium Sulfate and Nifedipine for Preterm Labor Prevention. J Babol Univ Med Sci. 2013;15:88–92.

    Google Scholar 

  33. García-Velasco JA, González González A. A prospective, randomized trial of nifedipine vs. ritodrine in threatened preterm labor. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998;61:239–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Glock JL, Morales WJ. Efficacy and safety of nifedipine versus magnesium sulfate in the management of preterm labor: a randomized study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169:960–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gurjar B, Sony, Rawat RP, Bala S. A Comparative Evaluation of Nifedipine, Ritodrine & Isoxsuprine as a tocolytic. J Med Sci Clin Res. 2017;5:22004–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Iftikhar P, Kanwal M. Role of nitroglycerin verses nifedipine in preterm labor. Isra Med J. 2017;9:277–9.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jaju PB, Dhabadi VB. Nifedipine versus Ritodrine for suppression of preterm labor and analysis of side effects. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2011;61(5):534–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-011-0083-y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Kashanian M, Zamen Z, Sheikhansari N. Comparison between nitroglycerin dermal patch and nifedipine for treatment of preterm labor: a randomized clinical trial. J Perinatol. 2014;34:683–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kaur P, Madan A, Sharma S. A comparative study of transdermal nitroglycerine patch and oral nifedipine in preterm labor. Ann Afr Med. 2021;20:31–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Nikbakht R, Taheri Moghadam M, Ghane’ee H. Nifedipine compared to magnesium sulfate for treating preterm labor: a randomized clinical trial. Iran J Reprod Med. 2014;12:145–50.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Niroomanesh S, Abedi F. Efficacy of nifedipine versus magnesium sulfate in the management of preterm labor. J Urmia Univ Med Sci. 2001. 12.

  42. Padmini P, Dharshini P. Comparison of oral nifedipine and transdermal nitroglycerine as a tocolytic for preterm labour. Chennai: Stanley Medical College; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Sharma N, Rani S, Huria A, Chawla D. Oral nifedipine versus nitroglycerine patch for tocolysis in preterm labour. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2019;8:174–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Vinodhini C. A Comparitive Study of Efficacy of Transdermal Nitroglycerine/Intravenous Magnesium Sulfate/Oral Nifedipine in Prevention of Preterm Labour: a Randomized controlled study. Salem: Government Mohan Kumaramangalam Medical College; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Yasmin S, Sabir S, Zahoor F. To compare the effectiveness of nifedipine and glyceryl trinitrate patch in prevention of preterm labour. J Postgrad Med Inst. 2016;30:92–6.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Zulfiqar S, Zulfiqar S, Khan SM. Comparison of nitroglycerine patch and nifedipine in treatment of preterm labour. J Sheikh Zayed Med Coll. 2016;7:965–7.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Khan AA, Urooj S, Ahsen S. Comparing use of nitroglycerine and nifedipine for preterm labour patients. Asian J Multidisciplinary Stud. 2019;7:11.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Khan Z, Shams G, Bashar H, Atiq S. Rehana. Preterm Labor and the efficacy of Magnesium Sulfate and Nifedipine in Management. Khyber J Med Sci. 2021;14:31–5.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Klauser CK, Briery CM, Martin RW, Langston L, Magann EF, Morrison JC. A comparison of three tocolytics for preterm labor: a randomized clinical trial. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:801–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kupferminc M, Lessing JB, Yaron Y, Peyser MR. Nifedipine versus Ritodrine for suppression of preterm labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1993;100:1090–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Subhashini K. Comparison of safety and efficacy of intravenous magnesium sulfate and oral nifedipine in treatment of preterm labour. Tiruchirappalli: KAP Viswanathan Government Medical College; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Akhtar Z, Amna B, Qamar S, Saddiqua A, Bibi N, Bibi S. Compare the effectiveness of Transdermal Nitro-Glycerine Versus oral nifedipine for Acute Tocolysis in Preterm Labour. Pakistan J Med Health Sci. 2020;14:2030–2.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Maryam Khan Badshah, Ara nUJ, Shahab T. Rubina Akhtar, comparison of Nitroglycerine vs Nifedipine for Preterm Labour. Med Forum Monthly. 2019;30:25–8.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Alavi A, Moallemi N, Zolfaghari G, Amjadi N. A comparison between tocolytic effect of Nifedipine and Magnesium sulfate in preterm labor pain.

  55. Kara M, Yılmaz E, Avcı İ, Öge T. Comparison of nifedipine with magnesium sulfate plus terbutaline for the treatment of preterm labor. J Turk Soc Obstet Gynecol. 2009;6:250–6.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Papatsonis DN, Van Geijn HP, Adèr HJ, Lange FM, Bleker OP, Dekker GA. Nifedipine and Ritodrine in the management of preterm labor: a randomized multicenter trial. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;90:230–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Ambedkar D, Kushwaha V. A comparative study between nifedipine and magnesium sulfate for treatment of preterm labor. Eur J Mol Clin Med. 2022;9:123–9.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Goyal N, Agrawal M, Dewani D, Reddy Eleti M. A comparative study of the effectiveness of Transdermal Nitroglycerine patches and oral nifedipine in prolongation of pregnancy in Women with Preterm Labour. Cureus. 2023;15:e39106.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Bhat S, Jain A, Sunil KS. Nifedipine versus magnesium sulfate in the management of preterm labour- A randomized controlled trial. Indian J Obstet Gynecol Res. 2023;10:460–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Kalburgi AP, Kshirsagar N. Which one is better for Tocolysis in Preterm Labor? Oral nifedipine vs Transdermal Nitroglycerin Patch. Natl J Med Res. 2023;13:50–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Saleem R, Akram S, Sabir F, Salam S, Akhtar N, Bashir N, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of Magnesium Sulfate Versus oral nifedipine in Acute Tocolysis of Preterm Labour. Pakistan J Med Health Sci. 2023;17:168–70.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Tavassoli F. Effectiveness of Nifedipine and Transdermal nitroglycerin in treatment of Preterm Labor. Asian Res J Gynecol Obstet. 2020;3:10–8.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Crowley C. P. Prophylactic corticosteroids for preterm birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000:CD000065.

  64. Sebastian E, Bykersma C, Eggleston A, Eddy KE, Chim ST, Zahroh RI, Scott N, Chou D, Oladapo OT, Vogel JP. Cost-effectiveness of antenatal corticosteroids and tocolytic agents in the management of preterm birth: a systematic review. EClinicalMedicine. 2022;49:101496.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R. Transdermal nitroglycerin for the treatment of preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:e5511–55118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Flenady V, Wojcieszek AM, Papatsonis DN, Stock OM, Murray L, Jardine LA, Carbonne B. Calcium channel blockers for inhibiting preterm labour and birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014:CD002255.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Duckitt K, Thornton S, O’Donovan OP, Dowswell T. Nitric oxide donors for treating preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;2014:CD002860.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Conde-Agudelo A, Romero R, Kusanovic JP. Nifedipine in the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204:e1341–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Oei SG, Mol BW, de Kleine MJ, Brölmann HA. Nifedipine versus Ritodrine for suppression of preterm labor; a meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1999;78:783–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Tsatsaris V, Papatsonis D, Goffinet F, Dekker G, Carbonne B. Tocolysis with nifedipine or beta-adrenergic agonists: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:840–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. King JF, Flenady VJ, Papatsonis DN, Dekker GA, Carbonne B. Calcium channel blockers for inhibiting preterm labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003:CD002255.

  72. Haas DM, Caldwell DM, Kirkpatrick P, McIntosh JJ, Welton NJ. Tocolytic therapy for preterm delivery: systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2012;345:e6226.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study is related to project No. 9901234 (code of ethics IR.NUMS.REC.1400.038) from the Ethical Committee, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran. The authors thank the Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences for financial support for the study.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran

    Maryam Zamani & Elham Azmoude

  2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Health, Torbat Heydariyeh University of Medical Sciences, Torbat Heydariyeh, Iran

    Rasoul Alimi

  3. Department of Nutrition, Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Neyshabur, Iran

    Seyyed Mostafa Arabi

  4. Global and Women’s Health, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Maryam Moradi

  5. Neyshabur University of Medical Sciences, Bagcheh Ban town, Neyshabur, Iran

    Elham Azmoude

Authors
  1. Maryam Zamani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rasoul Alimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seyyed Mostafa Arabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maryam Moradi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elham Azmoude
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

M.Z conceived the study. M.Z and R.A contributed to the literature search, screening articles, data extraction, and quality assessment. M.Z and R.A and E.A and M.M contributed to the literature search and manuscript drafting. R.A and S.A and M.Z analyzed and interpreted data. R.A and S.A revised the statistical analysis and final version of the manuscript. R.A supervised the study. The final form of the manuscript has been read and accepted by all authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elham Azmoude.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zamani, M., Alimi, R., Arabi, S.M. et al. Comparison of the efficacy of nifedipine with ritodrine, nitroglycerine and magnesium sulfate for the management of preterm labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 24, 318 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-06497-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-06497-w

Keywords

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

ISSN: 1471-2393

Contact us