Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Fármacos para el tratamiento del paludismo no complicado en mujeres embarazadas

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

Referencias de los estudios incluidos en esta revisión

Bounyasong 2001 {published data only}

Bounyasong S. Randomized trial of artesunate and mefloquine in comparison with quinine sulphate to treat P. falciparum malaria pregnant women. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand 2001;84(9):1289‐98.

Coulibaly 2006 {published data only}

Coulibaly SO, Nezien D, Traore S, Kone B, Magnussen P. Therapeutic efficacy of sulphadoxine‐pyrimethamine and chloroquine for the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in pregnancy in Burkina Faso. Malaria Journal 2006;5:49.

Kalilani 2007 {published data only}

Kalilani L, Mofolo I, Chaponda M, Rogerson SJ, Alker AP, Kwiek JJ, et al. A randomized controlled pilot trial of azithromycin or artesunate added to sulphadoxine‐pyrimethamine as treatment for malaria in pregnant women. PLos ONE 2007;11:1‐10.

Mbanzulu 1993 {published data only}

Mbanzulu PN, Tona L, Nekwei W, Kobota V, Kisile M, Makengo M. Management of malaria during pregnancy in Kinshasa (Zaire) by chloroquine and clindamycin [Traitment du paludisme de la femme enceinte a Kinshasa (Republique democratique du Congo) par la chloroquine et la clinadmycine]. Revue Francaise de Gynecologie et d'Obstetrique 1998;93(6):433‐7.

McGready 2000 {published data only}

McGready R, Brockman A, Cho T, Cho D, van Vugt M, Luxemburger C, et al. Randomized comparison of mefloquine‐artesunate versus quinine in the treatment of multidrug‐resistant falciparum malaria in pregnancy. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2000;94(6):689‐93.

McGready 2001a {published data only}

McGready R, Cho T, Samuel, Villegas L, Brockman A, van Vugt M, et al. Randomized comparison of quinine‐clindamycin versus artesunate in the treatment of falciparum malaria in pregnancy. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2001;95(6):651‐6.

McGready 2005 {published data only}

McGready R, Ashley EA, Moo E, Cho T, Barends M, Hutagalung R, et al. A randomized comparison of artesunate‐atovaquone‐proguanil versus quinine in treatment for uncomplicated falciparum malaria during pregnancy. Journal of Infectious Diseases 2005;192(5):846‐53.

Nosten 1993b {published data only}

Nosten F, ter Kuile F, Thwai KL, Maelankirri L, White NJ. Spriamycin does not potentiate quinine treatment of falciparum malaria in pregnancy. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1993;87(3):305‐6.

Sowunmi 1998a {published data only}

Sowunmi A, Oduola AMJ, Ogundahunsi OAT, Fehintola FA, Ilesanmi OA, Akinyinka OO, et al. Randomised trial of artemether versus artemether and mefloquine for the treatment of chloroquine/sulphadoxine‐pyrimethamine‐resistant falciparum malaria during pregnancy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1998;18(4):322‐7.

Tagbor 2006 {published data only}

Tagbor H, Bruce J, Browne E, Randal A, Greenwood B, Chandramohan D. Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of amodiaquine plus sulphadoxine‐pyrimethamine used alone or in combination for malaria treatment in pregnancy: a randomised trial. Lancet 2006;368(9544):1349‐56.
Tagbor H, Bruce J, Ord R, Randall A, Browne E, Greenwood B, et al. Comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of chloroquine and sulphadoxine‐pyremethamine in children and pregnant women. Tropical Medicine and International Health 2007;12(11):1288‐97.

Referencias de los estudios excluidos de esta revisión

Deen 2001 {published data only}

Deen JL, von Seidlein L, Pinder M, Walraven GEL, Greenwood BM. The safety of the combination artesunate and pyrimethamine‐sulphadoxine given during pregnancy. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2001;95(4):424‐8.

Keuter 1990 {published data only}

Keuter M, van Eijk A, Hoogstrate M, Raasveld M, van de Ree M, Ngwawe WA, et al. Comparison of chloroquine, pyrimethamine and sulfadoxine, and chloroproguanil and dapsone as treatment for falciparum malaria in pregnant and non‐pregnant women, Kakamega District, Kenya. BMJ 1990;301(6750):466‐70.

McGready 2001b {published data only}

McGready R, Cho T, Keo NK, Thwai KL, Villegas L, Looaresuwan S, et al. Artemisinin antimalarials in pregnancy: a prospective treatment study of 539 episodes of multidrug‐resistant Plasmodium falciparum. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2001;33(12):2009‐16.

Naing 1998 {published data only}

Naing T, Win H, Nwe YY. Falciparum malaria and pregnancy: relationship and treatment response. Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health 1998;19(2):253‐8.

Ndyomugyenyi 2000 {published data only}

Ndyomugyenyi R, Magnussen P. Chloroquine prophylaxis, iron/folic‐acid supplementation or case management of malaria attacks in primigravidae in western Uganda: effects on congenital malaria and infant haemoglobin concentrations. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 2000;94(8):759‐70.

Sowunmi 1998b {published data only}

Sowunmi A, Ilesanmi AO, Oduloa AMJ, Omitowoju GO, Ojengbede OA. Efficacy of mefloquine in uncomplicated chloroquine‐resistant falciparum malaria during pregnancy. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1998;16(5):362‐3.

Steketee 1996 {published data only}

Steketee RW, Wirima JJ, Hightower AW, Slutsker L, Heymann DL, Breman JG. The effect of malaria prevention in pregnancy on offspring birthweight, prematurity, and intrauterine growth retardation in rural Malawi. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1996;55 Suppl 1:33‐41.
Steketee RW, Wirima JJ, Slutsker L, Breman JG, Heymann DL. Comparability of treatment groups and risk factors for parasitemia at the first antenatal clinic visit in a study of malaria treatment and prevention in pregnancy in rural Malawi. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1996;55 Suppl 1:17‐23.
Steketee RW, Wirima JJ, Slutsker L, Khoromana CO, Heymann DL, Breman JG. Malaria treatment and prevention in pregnancy: indications for use and adverse events associated with use of chloroquine and mefloquine. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1996;55 Suppl 1:50‐6.
Steketee RW, Wirima JJ, Slutsker L, Roberts JM, Khoromana O, Heymann DL. Malaria parasite infection during pregnancy and at delivery in mother, placenta, and newborn: efficacy of chloroquine and mefloquine in rural Malawi. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1996;55 Suppl 1:24‐32.
Steketee RW, Wirima JJ, Slutsker WL, Khoromana CO, Breman JG, Heymann DL. Objectives and methodology in a study of malaria treatment and prevention in pregnancy in rural Malawi: The Mangochi Malaria Research Project. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 1996;55 Suppl 1:8‐16.

ISRCTN86353884 {published data only}

ISRCTN86353884. Co‐Artemether in pregnancy ‐ a pilot study (Thailand). www.controlled‐trials.com/ISRCTN86353884(accessed February 2008).

Adjuik 2004

Adjuik M, Babiker A, Garner P, Olliaro P, Taylor W, White N, International Artemisinin Study Group. Artesunate combinations for treatment of malaria: meta‐analysis. Lancet 2004;363(9402):9‐17.

Brabin 2001

Brabin BJ, Rogerson SJ. The epidemiology and outcomes of maternal malaria. In: Duffy PE, Fried M editor(s). Malaria in pregnancy: deadly parasite, susceptible host. London and New York: Taylor & Francis, 2001:27‐52.

Clyde 1981

Clyde DF. Clinical problems associated with the use of primaquine as a tissue schizontocidal and gametocytocidal drug. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 1981;59(3):391‐5.

Duffy 2001

Duffy PE. Immunity to malaria during pregnancy: different host, different parasite. In: Duffy PE, Fried M editor(s). Malaria in pregnancy: deadly parasite, susceptible host. London: Taylor & Francis, 2001:71‐127.

Gamble 2006

Gamble C, Ekwaru JP, ter Kuile FO. Insecticide‐treated nets for preventing malaria in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003755.pub2]

Garner 2006

Garner P, Gülmezoglu AM. Drugs for preventing malaria in pregnant women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000169.pub2]

Guerin 2002

Guerin PJ, Olliaro P, Nosten F, Druilhe P, Laxminarayan R, Binka F, et al. Malaria: current status of control, diagnosis, treatment, and a proposed agenda for research and development. Lancet Infectious Diseases 2002;2(9):564‐73.

Hoffman 1992

Hoffman SL. Diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of malaria. Medical Clinics of North America 1992;76(6):1327‐55.

Jüni 2001

Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 2001;323(7303):42‐6.

Lefebvre 2008

Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.0 (updated February 2008). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Lindsay 2000

Lindsay S, Ansell J, Selman C, Cox V, Hamilton K, Walraven G. Effect of pregnancy on exposure to malaria mosquitoes. Lancet 2000;355(9219):1972.

Menendez 2000

Menendez C, Ordi J, Ismail MR, Ventura PJ, Aponte JJ, Kahigwa E, et al. The impact of placental malaria on gestational age and birth weight. Journal of Infectious Diseases 2000;181(5):1740‐5.

Nosten 1993a

Nosten F, ter Kuile FO, Luxemberger C, Woodrow C, Kyle DE, Chongsuphajaisiddhi T, et al. Cardiac effects of antimalarial treatment with halofantrine. Lancet 1993;341(8852):1054‐6.

Nosten 1999

Nosten F, Vincenti M, Simpson J, Yei P, Thwai KL, de Vries A, et al. The effects of mefloquine treatment in pregnancy. Clinical Infectious Diseases 1999;28(4):808‐15.

Nosten 2001

Nosten F, McGready R. The treatment of malaria in pregnancy. In: Duffy PE, Fried M editor(s). Malaria in pregnancy: deadly parasite, susceptible host. London: Taylor & Francis, 2001:223‐41.

RBM 2003

Global Partnership to Roll Back Malaria, UNDP/World Bank/WHO Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases. Assessment of the safety of artemisinin compounds in pregnancy: report of two informal consultations convened by WHO in 2002. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003.

RBM 2005a

Global Partnership to Roll Back Malaria. World malaria report: 2005. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2005.

RBM 2005b

Roll Back Malaria (RBM) Partnership. Global Strategic Plan 2005‐2015. www.rollbackmalaria.org/forumV/docs/gsp_en.pdf November 2005 (accessed 1 May 2008).

Review Manager 5 [Computer program]

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.0. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.

Steketee 2001

Steketee RE, Nahlen BL, Parise ME, Menendez C. The burden of malaria in pregnancy in malaria‐endemic areas. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 2001;64 Suppl 1‐2:28‐35.

Stevens 2000

Stevens RD. Anaemia ‐‐ the scourge of the Third World. Health Millions 2000;26(2):21‐3.

Taylor 2004

Taylor WR, White NJ. Antimalarial drug toxicity: a review. Drug Safety 2004;27(1):25‐61.

White 1999

White NJ, Nosten F, Looareesuwan S, Watkins WM, Mrash K, Snow RW, et al. Averting a malaria disaster. Lancet 1999;353(9168):1965‐7.

WHO 2003a

World Health Organization, Global Partnership to Roll Back Malaria. The Abuja Declaration and the plan of action: an extract from the African Summit on Roll Back Marlaria, Abuja, 25 April 2000 [WHO/CDS/RBM/2000.17]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003.

WHO 2003b

World Health Organization. Lives at risk: malaria in pregnancy. www.who.int/features/2003/04b/en(accessed December 2004).

WHO 2003c

Global Partnership to Roll Back Malaria. Assessment and monitoring of antimalarial drug efficacy for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparium malaria. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2003.

WHO 2004a

World Health Organization, Regional Office for Africa. A strategic framework for malaria prevention and control during pregnancy in the African region. Brazzaville: World Health Organization, 2004.

WHO 2004b

World Health Organization, Regional Office for Africa. Malaria control in Africa: progress report on implementation of the plan of action of the Abuja Declaration. Brazzaville: WHO Regional Office for Africa, 2004.

WHO 2006

World Health Organization Roll Back Malaria Department. Guidelines for the treatment of malaria [WHO/HTM/MAL/2006.1108]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2006.

WHO 2007

World Health Organization Global Malaria Programme. Anti‐malarial drug policies: AFRO, AMRO, EMRO, EURO, SEARO, WPRO. www.who.int/malaria/treatmentpolicies.html Updated April 2007 (accessed August 2007).

Referencias de otras versiones publicadas de esta revisión

Orton 2005

Orton L, Garner P. Drugs for treating uncomplicated malaria in pregnant women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004912.pub2]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Bounyasong 2001

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: no method reported

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: none

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 95% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 60 randomized, 57 analysed

Inclusion criteria: pregnant women infected with P. falciparum; gestational age at least 28 weeks; not more than 4% parasitized red blood cells; could be followed up at Srisangwal Hospital; could take and tolerate oral form of the medicine and be admitted to the hospital for at least 7 days

Exclusion criteria: former medication with quinine, artesunate (including its derivatives), or mefloquine within 28 days; history of quinine, artesunate, or mefloquine allergy; malaria with complications such as shock, renal failure, pulmonary oedema, or cerebral malaria; mixed malarial infection

Age in years (mean): artesunate plus mefloquine group 27.207; quinine group 26.143

Parity (mean): artesunate plus mefloquine group 1.59; quinine group 1.36

Early/late pregnancy: second trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: number not reported

Anaemia on admission: number not reported

Interventions

1. Artesunate plus mefloquine
Artesunate: 2 mg/kg loading dose and 1 mg/kg every 12 hours for at least 5 days (until parasites are absent and there is clinical improvement)
Mefloquine: 15 mg/kg on day 6 and 10 mg/kg 6 hours later

2. Quinine sulfate: 10 mg/kg every 8 hours for at least 7 days (until clinically recovered)

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 28
2. Fever clearance time
3. Parasite clearance time
4. Haematocrit
5. Birthweight
6. Gestational age at birth
7. Congenital abnormalities
8. Infant development
9. Adverse events

Not included in review:
10. Treatment time of parasite presentation
11. Intra‐uterine growth retardation

Notes

Location: Mae Hong Son, Thailand

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: not reported

Local antimalarial drug resistance: multiple‐drug resistance

Supervision of treatment: not reported

Coulibaly 2006

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: computer‐generated, random‐number list

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: none

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 83% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 147 randomized, 122 analysed

Inclusion criteria: primigravidae or secundigravidae; gestation 12 to 36 weeks (fundal height < 30 cm); axillary temperature ≥ 37.5 °C; recent history of fever (within 48 hours preceding enrolment); or presence of clinical malaria‐related symptoms; mono‐infection with P. falciparum density ≥ 2000 parasites/mm3 blood; absence of clinical signs of severe malaria; absence of other patent infections; absence of previous severe reaction to chloroquine or sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine; staying in neighbouring district/village; able to come for follow up; consent

Exclusion criteria: other febrile disease than malaria; use of interfering treatment during follow‐up period; high‐risk pregnancy

Age in years (median (range)): 20 (15 to 29)

Parity: primigravidae and secundigravidae

Early/late pregnancy: second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: all women symptomatic

Anaemia on admission: 81% (21% severe malaria)

Interventions

1. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine: 25 mg/kg sulfadoxine and 1.25 mg/kg pyrimethamine in 1 dose
2. Chloroquine: 10 mg/kg on days 0 and 1; 5 mg/kg on day 2

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 14
2. Treatment failure at day 28
3. Adverse reactions

Not included in review:
4. Anaemia
5. Parasitaemia
6. Gametocytaemia
7. Early treatment failure
8. Late clinical failure
9. Late parasitological failure

Notes

Location: Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: endemic but seasonal

Local antimalarial drug resistance: increasing resistance to chloroquine; and some resistance to sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine

Supervision of treatment: all treatments were supervised

Data awaiting: none

Additional notes: trial for monitoring of therapeutic efficacy; women who failed study treatment were given quinine

Kalilani 2007

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: random‐number list; block randomized

Allocation concealment: sealed envelopes

Blinding: outcome assessor

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 84% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 141 randomized, 118 analysed

Inclusion criteria: peripheral parasitaemia; P. falciparum; aged 15 to 49 years; estimated fetal gestational age 14 to 26 weeks; mother had felt fetal movement; available for follow up until delivery

Exclusion criteria: multiple gestations; history of chronic disease such as tuberculosis or diabetes; mental health disorder; known allergies to drugs containing sulfonamides; macrolides or pyrimethamine; pregnancy complications; taken antimalarial drugs within 28 days before enrolment

Age in years (median (interquartile range)): 20 (17 to 24)

Parity: mostly primigravidae, some secundigravidae

Early/late pregnancy: mainly third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: not stated

Anaemia on admission: not stated

Interventions

1. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine: 1500 mg sulfadoxine, 75 mg pyrimethamine in 1 dose
2. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine and azithromycin: 1500 mg sulfadoxine, 75 mg pyrimethamine in 1 dose, and 1 g/day azithromycin for 2 days
3. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine and artesunate: 1500 mg sulfadoxine, 75 mg pyrimethamine in 1 dose, and artesunate 200 mg/day for 3 days

All treatment courses given twice, at least 4 weeks apart

All participants also given 200 mg ferrous sulfate and 0.25 mg folic acid for daily administration, and insecticide‐treated bed nets

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days
2. Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days (excludes new infections using PCR)
3. Maternal anaemia
4. Low birthweight
5. Perinatal death
6. Neonatal death

Not included in review:
7. Placental parasite clearance

Notes

Location: Mpemba and Madziabango health centres, Blantyre District, Malawi

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: perennial, peaks in rainy season

Local antimalarial drug resistance: not reported

Supervision of treatment: directly observed

Additional notes: pilot for larger study of intermittent preventive treatment, therefore two treatment courses given; trial authors report that statistically significantly more women who received sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine or azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine were diagnosed as HIV positive than those who received artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (but many women refused the routine testing)

Mbanzulu 1993

Methods

Quasi‐randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: alternate allocation

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: assessor blinded

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 100% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 132 randomized and analysed

Inclusion criteria: at least 18 weeks pregnant; 1000 parasites per mm3; no prior antimalarial; not vomiting; consent

Exclusion criteria: none reported

Average age in years (mean (range)): not reported; most between 17 and 24 (15 to 40)

Parity: 0 to 7; most 0 to 1

Early/late pregnancy: at least 18 weeks

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: number not reported

Anaemia on admission: number not reported

Interventions

1. Chloroquine plus clindamycin (for 3 days)
Chloroquine: 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 2; 5 mg/kg on day 3
Clindamycin: 10 mg/kg for 3 days

2. Chloroquine plus clindamycin (for 5 days)
Chloroquine: 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 2; 5 mg/kg on day 3
Clindamycin: 10 mg/kg for 5 days

3. Chloroquine: 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 2; 5 mg/kg on day 3

Outcomes

1. Treatment failures at day 14
2. Adverse events

Notes

Location: Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: not reported

Local antimalarial drug resistance: some resistance to chloroquine, amodiaquine, and quinine

Supervision of treatment: not reported

Data awaiting: authors contacted 2005, awaiting additional trial data

McGready 2000

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: block randomization

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: none

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 92% (for treatment failure) and 75% (for low birthweight)

Participants

Number: 115 randomized, 108 analysed (86 and 108 for primary outcomes)

Inclusion criteria: pregnant women in their second or third trimester seen at antenatal clinics of Shoklo and Maela camps; microscopy‐confirmed uncomplicated P. falciparum infection; fully informed verbal consent

Exclusion criteria: severe complicated malaria; intercurrent infection requiring hospitalization; allergy to quinine or mefloquine; < 12 weeks gestation; history of mental disorder or mefloquine‐induced psychosis

Age in years (median (range)): artesunate plus mefloquine group 24 (15 to 37); quinine group 23 (16 to 36)

Parity: artesunate plus mefloquine group 18/66 primapara; quinine group 12/42 primapara

Early/late pregnancy: second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: many women oligosymptomatic or asymptomatic

Anaemia on admission: artesunate plus mefloquine group 33/66 anaemic; quinine group 22/42 anaemic

Interventions

1. Artesunate plus mefloquine
Artesunate: 4 mg/kg on days 0, 1, and 2
Mefloquine: 15 mg/kg on day 1 and 10 mg/kg on day 2

2. Quinine sulfate: 10 mg/kg every 8 hours for 7 days

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections using PCR)
2. Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections using PCR)
3. Abortion
4. Stillbirth
5. Congenital abnormalities
6. Mean birthweight
7. Anaemia and haematocrit
8. Perinatal death
9. Adverse events

Not included in review:
10. Treatment failure at 48 hours
11. Gametocyte positivity
12. Person‐gametocyte‐weeks
13. Placental weight
14. Estimated gestational age
15. Infant development

Notes

Location: Maela and Shoklo camps for displaced people of the Karen ethnic minority on the north‐west border of Thailand

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: low and seasonal

Local antimalarial drug resistance: multiple‐drug resistance

Supervision of treatment: all treatments supervised

Data awaiting: authors contacted, awaiting additional trial data

Additional notes: Médecins Sans Frontières is the main provider of medicine; treatment failures (up to day 63) were given artesunate for a further 7 days; all mothers requested to deliver at clinic

McGready 2001a

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: no method reported

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: none

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 71% (for treatment failure) and 83% (for low birthweight)

Participants

Number: 131 randomized, 129 analysed (93 and 109 for primary outcomes)

Inclusion criteria: pregnant women; second or third trimester; seen at antenatal clinics of Shoklo and Maela camps; microscopy‐confirmed uncomplicated P. falciparum infection; consent

Exclusion criteria: severe or complicated malaria; intercurrent infections requiring hospitalization; allergy to quinine, artesunate, clindamycin; major liver or kidney disease; gestation < 12 weeks

Age in years (median (range)): artesunate group 25 (15 to 41); quinine plus clindamycin group 24 (15 to 41)

Parity: artesunate group 26.2% primipara; quinine plus clindamycin group 26.6% primipara

Early/late pregnancy: second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: many women are oligosymptomatic or asymptomatic

Anaemia on admission: number not reported

Interventions

1. Artesunate: 2 mg/kg on days 0 to 4; 1 mg/kg on days 5 and 6
2. Quinine plus clindamycin
Quinine: 10 mg/kg every 8 hours for 7 days
Clindamycin: 5 mg/kg every 8 hours for 7 days

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 42
2. Treatment failure (excludes new infections using PCR) at day 42
3. Congenital abnormalities
4. Stillbirth
5. Infant mortality
6. Low birthweight and mean birthweight
7. Anaemia
8. Haematocrit

Not included in review:
9. Mean placental weight
10. Estimated gestational age at delivery

Notes

Location: Maela and Shoklo camps for displaced people of the Karen ethnic minority on the north‐west border of Thailand

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: low and seasonal

Local antimalarial drug resistance: multiple‐drug resistance

Supervision of treatment: all treatments were supervised

Data awaiting: authors contacted 2005, awaiting additional trial data

Additional notes: Médecins Sans Frontières main provider of medicine; treatment given orally with a small amount of sugar and water; women asked to deliver at clinic (although usually deliver at home)

McGready 2005

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: computer generated in blocks of 10

Allocation concealment: envelopes

Blinding: outcome assessor

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 99% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 81 randomized, 80 analysed

Inclusion criteria: healthy; first episode of (uncomplicated) falciparum or mixed malaria detected by weekly screening; haematocrit level ≥ 20%; second (> 13 weeks) or early third (< 32 weeks) trimester of pregnancy

Exclusion criteria: known chronic disease; inability to follow antenatal clinic consultation; history of alcohol abuse; imminent delivery; inability to tolerate oral treatment

Age in years (mean (standard deviation)): 26 (7) vs 26 (6)

Parity: just under 1/3 primigravida

Early/late pregnancy: second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: detected by screening so likely to be asymptomatic

Anaemia on admission: not severe anaemia

Interventions

1. Quinine sulfate: 10 mg/kg every 8 hours for 7 days
2. Atovaquone‐proguanil plus artesunate
Atovaquone‐proguanil: fixed‐dose tablet (atovaquone 20 mg/kg and primaquine 8 mg/kg) once a day for 3 days
Artesunate: 4 mg/kg once a day for 3 days

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 63
2. Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections using PCR)
3. Fever clearance time
4. Low birthweight and mean birthweight
5. Anaemia (and severe anaemia)
6. Prematurity and estimated gestational age at delivery
7. Intra‐uterine growth retardation
8. Congenital abnormality
9. Tinnitus

Not included in review:
10. Stillbirth
11. Infant death in first 12 months (neonatal)
12. Total infant developmental score at 12 months
13. Vomiting drugs
14. Urticaria

Notes

Location: Maela and Shoklo camps for displaced people of the Karen ethnic minority on the north‐west border of Thailand

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: low and seasonal

Local antimalarial drug resistance: multiple‐drug resistance (only artemisinin therapies known to be effective)

Supervision of treatment: all treatments supervised

Additional notes: treatment given orally with sugar and water (quinine) or chocolate milk (atovaquone proguanil plus artesunate); any women with reappearance of parasites after the primary treatment were retreated with artesunate and clindamycin for 7 days

Nosten 1993b

Methods

Quasi‐randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: paired, restricted, sequential trial

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: none

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 74.4% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 43 randomized, 32 analysed

Inclusion criteria: uncomplicated P. falciparum malaria; second or third trimester; fully informed consent

Exclusion criteria: none reported

Average age in years (mean (standard devation)): quinine plus spiramycin group 26 (6.2); quinine plus placebo group 28 (6.8)

Parity (median): quinine plus spiramycin group 2; quinine plus placebo group 4

Early/late pregnancy in gestation weeks (median): second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: many women oligosymptomatic or asymptomatic

Anaemia on admission: number not reported

Interventions

1. Quinine plus spiramycin
Quinine sulfate salt: 30 mg/kg every day for 5 days
Spiramycin: 2 "Miu" 3 times a day for 5 days

2. Quinine plus placebo
Quinine sulfate salt: 30 mg/kg every day for 5 days

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 28
2. Parasite clearance time
3. Abortion
4. Adverse events

Notes

Location: Shoklo camp, Thai‐Burmese border

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: not reported

Local antimalarial drug resistance: multiple‐drug resistance (unsupervised 7‐day quinine treatment has a failure rate of 50% in pregnant women with uncomplicated malaria)

Supervision of treatment: supervised

Data awaiting: authors contacted, awaiting additional trial data

Additional notes: despite high resistance, quinine is the only treatment available for pregnant women in the area; quinine was given as a supervised 5‐day course as this is the average actual intake when the standard 7‐day regimen is not supervised (usual practice)

Sowunmi 1998a

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: no method reported

Allocation concealment: no method reported

Blinding: none

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 100% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 55 randomized, 55 analysed

Inclusion criteria: non‐response to chloroquine or sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine, or both, as shown by failure of complete clearance of parasitaemia in the 2 weeks following a course of treatment; oral fluid intolerance; no history of allergy to known antimalarial drugs; second or third trimester pregnancy; consent of patients

Exclusion criteria: none reported

Average age in years (mean (standard deviation; range)): artemether plus mefloquine group 29.9 (6.1; 21 to 41); artemether group 28.9 (5.1; 20 to 40)

Parity: mostly primigravidae (29/45)

Early/late pregnancy: second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: symptomatic

Anaemia on admission: number not reported

Interventions

1. Artemether plus mefloquine
Artemether: 3.2 mg/kg intramuscularly on day 0
Mefloquine: 7.5 mg/kg on days 1 and 2

2. Artemether: 3.2 mg/kg intramuscularly on day 0; 1.6 mg/kg daily for next 4 days

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 14 (for artemether plus mefloquine group) and day 28 (for artemether group)
2. Fever clearance time
3. Parasite clearance time
4. Stillbirth
5. Mean birthweight
6. Congenital (physical) abnormalities
7. Neonatal malaria
8. Haematocrit
9. Adverse events

Not included in review:
10. Intra‐uterine growth retardation
11. Icterus in newborns
12. Infant development

Notes

Location: Nigeria

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: not reported

Local antimalarial drug resistance: multiple‐drug resistance (artemether and mefloquine resistance low, no artemisinin―mefloquine cross‐resistance)

Supervision of treatment: supervised

Tagbor 2006

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Generation of allocation sequence: randomized‐number list in blocks of 16

Allocation concealment: envelopes

Blinding: participant, treatment provider, outcome assessor, and data analyst

Inclusion of all randomized participants: 93% (for treatment failure)

Participants

Number: 900 randomized; 838 analysed

Inclusion criteria: pregnant; gestational age ≥16 weeks; attended antenatal clinic between March 2003 and September 2004; with peripheral blood parasitaemia

Exclusion criteria: multiple pregnancy; severe malaria; enrolled previously in the current study

Age in years: roughly 23

Parity: all parities, about half primigravida

Early/late pregnancy: 16 weeks plus, second and third trimester

Symptomatic/asymptomatic malaria: detected by screening so likely to be asymptomatic

Anaemia on admission: number not reported

Interventions

1. Chloroquine: 600 mg on days 1 and 2; 300 mg on day 3

2. Amodiaquine: 600 mg on days 1 and 2; 300 mg on day 3

3. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine
Sulfadoxine: single dose 1500 mg
Pyrimethamine: single dose 75 mg

4. Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine
Amodiaquine: 600 mg on days 1 and 2; 300 mg on day 3
Sulfadoxine: single dose 1500 mg on day 1
Pyrimethamine: single dose 75 mg on day 1

Outcomes

1. Treatment failure at day 14
2. Treatment failure at day 28
3. Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections using PCR)
4. Placental parasitaemia
5. Low birthweight
6. Preterm delivery
7. Adverse events

Not included in review:
8. Placental parasite clearance
9. Birthweight
10. Abortion
11. Stillbirth
12. Perinatal death
13. Neonatal death
14. Congenital abnormality

Notes

Location: St Theresa's Hospital, Nkoranza, Ghana

Local malaria endemicity/transmission: perennial (peaks in rainy season – July and August)

Local antimalarial drug resistance: unclear

Supervision of treatment: first dose supervised (given by study team) second and third doses taken at home

HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; P. falciparum: Plasmodium falciparum; PCR: polymerase chain reaction.

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Deen 2001

Participants not diagnosed with malaria

Keuter 1990

Nonrandomized study

McGready 2001b

Nonrandomized study

Naing 1998

Nonrandomized study

Ndyomugyenyi 2000

No control group

Sowunmi 1998b

No control group

Steketee 1996

Some participants not parasitaemic

Characteristics of ongoing studies [ordered by study ID]

ISRCTN86353884

Trial name or title

"Co‐Artemether in pregnancy ‐ a pilot study (Thailand)"

Methods

Randomized controlled trial

Participants

Inclusion criteria: pregnant women with uncomplicated falciparum or mixed infection in second or third trimester who have failed after a course of quinine for 7 days; attend the Shoklo Malaria Research Unit AnteNatal Clinics regularly; agree to deliver at the Shoklo Malaria Research Unit

Exclusion criteria: splenectomy; known chronic disease (cardiac, renal, hepatic); known haemoglobinopathy; known hepatic or renal impairment; inability to follow AnteNatal Clinics consultation; history of alcohol or narcotic abuse; inability to tolerate oral treatment; severe and complicated malaria; known hypersensitivity to artemisinin derivatives; taking any drug inhibiting the cytochrome enzyme CYP3A4 or drug that is metabolized by cytochrome enzyme CYPD or family; history of sudden death or of prolongation of QTc interval on electrocardiogram; cardiac arrytyhmia, congestive cardiac failure, or bradycardia accompanied by reduced left ventricular function; intake of drugs that prolong QTc interval

Interventions

1. Artesunate: 50 mg tablets (2 mg/kg/day) for 7 days
2. Co‐artemether (20/120 mg artemether/lumefantrine): 4 tablets twice a day for 3 days with 200 mL chocolate milk at each dose

Outcomes

1. PCR‐adjusted parasitological cure at day 42 or at delivery, depending on which occurs last
2. Gametocyte carriage
3. Pharmaokinetic parameters
4. Histopathology examination (presence of parasites, pigments, monocytes infiltrations, and other placental changes) of the placenta

Starting date

6 February 2004

Anticipated end date: 1 January 2008

Contact information

Dr Melba Gomes ([email protected]), World Health Organization, Switzerland

Notes

Location: Thailand

Registration number: ISRCTN86353884

Source of funding: NICEF/UNDP/World Bank/WHO – Special Programme for Research and Training in Tropical Diseases (TDR)

PCR: polymerase chain reaction.

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 63 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63.

2 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

3 Anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Anaemia.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Anaemia.

4 Tinnitus Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Tinnitus.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Tinnitus.

5 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.

6 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Mean birthweight.

7 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Preterm delivery.

8 Gestational age Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Gestational age.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Gestational age.

9 Intra‐uterine growth retardation Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Intra‐uterine growth retardation.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Intra‐uterine growth retardation.

10 Congenital abnormality Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 10 Congenital abnormality.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 10 Congenital abnormality.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 2. Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

2 Anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Anaemia.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Anaemia.

2.1 On admission

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 Day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.3 Day 28

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.4 Day 42

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.5 Day 63

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Nervous system adverse events Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Nervous system adverse events.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Nervous system adverse events.

3.1 Abnormal neurology

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Blurring vision

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 Dizziness

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 Headache

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Tinnitus

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Vertigo

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Gastrointestinal adverse events Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Gastrointestinal adverse events.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Gastrointestinal adverse events.

4.1 Abdominal pain

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 Anorexia

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 Nausea

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 Vomiting

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Other adverse events Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Other adverse events.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Other adverse events.

5.1 Hypoglycaemia

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 Muscle and joint pain

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.3 Palpitations

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Low birthweight.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Low birthweight.

7 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Mean birthweight.

8 Abortion Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Abortion.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Abortion.

9 Neonatal jaundice Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Neonatal jaundice.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Neonatal jaundice.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 3. Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.

2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

3 Maternal anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

5 Perinatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

6 Neonatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 4. Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days.

2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

3 Maternal anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

5 Perinatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

6 Neonatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 5. Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean parasite clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Mean parasite clearance time.

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Mean parasite clearance time.

2 Mean gestational age at delivery Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Mean gestational age at delivery.

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Mean gestational age at delivery.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 6. Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at 48 hours (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at 48 hours (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at 48 hours (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

2 Mean parasite clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.

3 Anaemia at day 7 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 3 Anaemia at day 7.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 3 Anaemia at day 7.

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 6.4

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

5 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 6.5

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 5 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 5 Mean birthweight.

6 Mean gestational age at delivery Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 6.6

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 6 Mean gestational age at delivery.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 6 Mean gestational age at delivery.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 7. Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean fever clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 1 Mean fever clearance time.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 1 Mean fever clearance time.

2 Mean parasite clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

3.1 Abdominal discomfort

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Dizziness

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 4 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 4 Mean birthweight.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 8. Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 28 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.

2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 8.2

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 8.3

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

3.1 Any "side effect" at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Any "side effect" at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 General weakness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 General weakness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Dizziness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Dizziness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.7 Vomiting day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.8 Vomiting at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.9 Itching at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.10 Itching at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.11 Nausea at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.12 Nausea at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 8.4

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

5 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 8.5

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 9. Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 28 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.

2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

3.1 Any "side effect" at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Any "side effect" at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 General weakness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 General weakness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Dizziness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Dizziness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.7 Vomiting at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.8 Vomiting at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.9 Itching at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.10 Itching at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.11 Nausea at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.12 Nausea at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.4

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

5 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 9.5

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 10. Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.

2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

3 Maternal anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.4

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

5 Perinatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

6 Neonatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 11. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 14 Show forest plot

2

544

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.29, 1.09]

Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.

2 Treatment failure at day 28 Show forest plot

2

538

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.46 [0.33, 0.64]

Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28.

3 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.3

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

4 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.4

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Adverse events.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Adverse events.

4.1 Any "side effect" at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 Any "side effect" at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 General weakness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 General weakness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.5 Dizziness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.6 Dizziness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.7 Vomiting at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.8 Vomiting at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.9 Itching at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.10 Itching at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.11 Nausea at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.12 Nausea at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.5

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.

6 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 11.6

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 6 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 6 Preterm delivery.

Open in table viewer
Comparison 12. Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 14 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.

1.1 3‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 5‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Adverse event: itching Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.2

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Adverse event: itching.

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Adverse event: itching.

2.1 3‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 5‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Adverse event: diarrhoea Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Analysis 12.3

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse event: diarrhoea.

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse event: diarrhoea.

3.1 3‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 5‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN): Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN): Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)

Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN): Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN): Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)

Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP): Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP): Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)

Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ): Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ): Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)

Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ): Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ): Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)

Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP): Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 6

Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP): Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR)

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Anaemia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Anaemia.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Tinnitus.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Tinnitus.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Mean birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Preterm delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Gestational age.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Gestational age.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Intra‐uterine growth retardation.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Intra‐uterine growth retardation.

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 10 Congenital abnormality.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 10 Congenital abnormality.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Anaemia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Anaemia.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Nervous system adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 3 Nervous system adverse events.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Gastrointestinal adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 4 Gastrointestinal adverse events.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Other adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 5 Other adverse events.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 6 Low birthweight.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Mean birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 7 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Abortion.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 8 Abortion.

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Neonatal jaundice.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 9 Neonatal jaundice.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.3

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.4

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.5

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.6

Comparison 4 Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Mean parasite clearance time.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 1 Mean parasite clearance time.

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Mean gestational age at delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN), Outcome 2 Mean gestational age at delivery.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at 48 hours (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at 48 hours (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.2

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 3 Anaemia at day 7.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.3

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 3 Anaemia at day 7.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.4

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 5 Mean birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.5

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 5 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 6 Mean gestational age at delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 6.6

Comparison 6 Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD), Outcome 6 Mean gestational age at delivery.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 1 Mean fever clearance time.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 1 Mean fever clearance time.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 2 Mean parasite clearance time.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 3 Adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.3

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 4 Mean birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 7.4

Comparison 7 Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM), Outcome 4 Mean birthweight.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.2

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.3

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.4

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 8.5

Comparison 8 Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 28.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse events.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.4

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.5

Comparison 9 Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 3 Maternal anaemia.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.4

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 4 Low birthweight.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 5 Perinatal death.

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP), Outcome 6 Neonatal death.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.1

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.2

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Treatment failure at day 28.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.3

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR).

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Adverse events.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.4

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 4 Adverse events.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.5

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 5 Low birthweight.

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 6 Preterm delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 11.6

Comparison 11 Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 6 Preterm delivery.

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.1

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 1 Treatment failure at day 14.

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Adverse event: itching.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.2

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 2 Adverse event: itching.

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse event: diarrhoea.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 12.3

Comparison 12 Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ), Outcome 3 Adverse event: diarrhoea.

Table 1. Detailed search strategies

Search set

CIDG SRa

CENTRAL

MEDLINEb

EMBASEb

LILACSb

1

malaria

malaria

malaria

malaria

malaria

2

pregnan*

pregnan*

Exp MALARIA

MALARIA

pregnan*

3

1 and 2

pregnan*

pregnan$

1 and 2

4

PREGNANCY

PREGNANCY

5

1 or 2

1 or 2

6

3 or 4

3 or 4

7

5 and 6

5 and 6

8

Limit 7 to human

Limit 7 to human

aCochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register.
bSearch terms used in combination with the search strategy for retrieving trials developed by The Cochrane Collaboration (Lefebvre 2008); upper case: MeSH or EMTREE heading; lower case: free text term.

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. Detailed search strategies
Table 2. Risk of bias of included trialsa

Trial

Generation of allocation sequence

Allocation concealment

Blinding

Inclusion of all randomized participants in the final analysisb

Bounyasong 2001

Unclear

Unclear

None

Adequate

Coulibaly 2006

Adequate

Unclear

None

Inadequate

Kalilani 2007

Adequate

Adequate

Outcome assessor

Inadequate

Mbanzulu 1993

Inadequate

Unclear

Outcome assessor

Adequate

McGready 2000

Adequate

Unclear

None

Adequate

McGready 2001a

Unclear

Unclear

None

Inadequate

McGready 2005

Adequate

Adequate

Outcome assessor

Adequate

Nosten 1993b

Inadequate

Unclear

None

Inadequate

Sowunmi 1998a

Unclear

Unclear

None

Adequate

Tagbor 2006

Adequate

Adequate

Participant, treatment provider, outcome assessor, data analyst

Adequate

aSee 'Assessment of risk of bias in included studies' for the assessment methods, and the 'Characteristics of included studies' for the methods used in each trial.
bFor primary outcomes.

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. Risk of bias of included trialsa
Comparison 1. Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 63 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Tinnitus Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 Gestational age Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9 Intra‐uterine growth retardation Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

10 Congenital abnormality Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Artesunate plus atovaquone‐proguanil (AS+AP) vs quinine (QN)
Comparison 2. Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 63 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 On admission

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 Day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.3 Day 28

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.4 Day 42

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.5 Day 63

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Nervous system adverse events Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Abnormal neurology

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Blurring vision

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 Dizziness

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 Headache

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Tinnitus

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Vertigo

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Gastrointestinal adverse events Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 Abdominal pain

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 Anorexia

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 Nausea

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 Vomiting

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Other adverse events Show forest plot

2

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5.1 Hypoglycaemia

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.2 Muscle and joint pain

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5.3 Palpitations

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

7 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 Abortion Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

9 Neonatal jaundice Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Artesunate plus mefloquine (AS+MQ) vs quinine (QN)
Comparison 3. Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Maternal anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Perinatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Neonatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP)
Comparison 4. Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at delivery or 40 days Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Maternal anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Perinatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Neonatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. Artesunate plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AS+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP)
Comparison 5. Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean parasite clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Mean gestational age at delivery Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. Quinine plus spiramycin (QN+SPI) vs quinine (QN)
Comparison 6. Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at 48 hours (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Mean parasite clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Anaemia at day 7 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Mean gestational age at delivery Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 6. Artesunate (AS) vs quinine plus clindamycin (QN+CLD)
Comparison 7. Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean fever clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Mean parasite clearance time Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Abdominal discomfort

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Dizziness

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Mean birthweight Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 7. Artemether plus mefloquine (ATM+MQ) vs artemether (ATM)
Comparison 8. Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 28 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Any "side effect" at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Any "side effect" at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 General weakness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 General weakness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Dizziness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Dizziness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.7 Vomiting day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.8 Vomiting at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.9 Itching at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.10 Itching at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.11 Nausea at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.12 Nausea at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 8. Amodiaquine plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AQ+SP) vs chloroquine (CQ)
Comparison 9. Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 28 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 Any "side effect" at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 Any "side effect" at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.3 General weakness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.4 General weakness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.5 Dizziness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.6 Dizziness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.7 Vomiting at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.8 Vomiting at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.9 Itching at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.10 Itching at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.11 Nausea at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.12 Nausea at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 9. Amodiaquine (AQ) vs chloroquine (CQ)
Comparison 10. Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 Treatment failure at delivery or day 40 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3 Maternal anaemia Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

5 Perinatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Neonatal death Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 10. Azithromycin plus sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (AZM+SP) vs sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP)
Comparison 11. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 14 Show forest plot

2

544

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.56 [0.29, 1.09]

2 Treatment failure at day 28 Show forest plot

2

538

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.46 [0.33, 0.64]

3 Treatment failure at day 28 (excludes new infections, detected by PCR) Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4 Adverse events Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

4.1 Any "side effect" at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.2 Any "side effect" at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.3 General weakness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.4 General weakness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.5 Dizziness at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.6 Dizziness at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.7 Vomiting at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.8 Vomiting at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.9 Itching at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.10 Itching at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.11 Nausea at day 3

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

4.12 Nausea at day 7

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Low birthweight Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

6 Preterm delivery Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 11. Sulfadoxine‐pyrimethamine (SP) vs chloroquine (CQ)
Comparison 12. Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ)

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Treatment failure at day 14 Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

1.1 3‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

1.2 5‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2 Adverse event: itching Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2.1 3‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

2.2 5‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Adverse event: diarrhoea Show forest plot

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

3.1 3‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3.2 5‐day clindamycin

1

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 12. Chloroquine plus clindamycin (CQ+CLD) for 3 or 5 days vs chloroquine (CQ)