Predictors of Short Latency Period Exceeding 48 h after Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes.
latency
outpatient
predictive factors
preterm premature rupture of membranes
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Jan 2021
04 Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
19
11
2020
revised:
18
12
2020
accepted:
29
12
2020
entrez:
7
1
2021
pubmed:
8
1
2021
medline:
8
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) is a complication responsible for a third of preterm births. Clinical management is initially hospital based, but homecare management is possible if patients are clinically stable 48 h after PPROM. This study set out to determine factors that are predictive of short latency (delivery ≤ 7 days) exceeding 48 h after PPROM, enabling estimation of the prevalence of maternal and neonatal complications and comparison of maternal and fetal outcomes between inpatient and outpatient management. This was a monocentric retrospective study conducted between 1 January 2010 and 28 February 2017 on all patients experiencing PPROM at 24 to 34 weeks + 6 days and who gave birth after 48 h. Maternal, obstetric, fetal, and neonatal variables were included in the data collected. The primary endpoint was latency, defined as the number of days between rupture of membranes and delivery. 170 consecutive patients were analyzed. Short latency could be predicted by the need for tocolysis, a cervical length less than 25 mm at admission and the existence of anamnios. Outpatient follow-up was not found to lead to increased maternal morbidity or neonatal mortality. Our study highlights predictive factors of short latency exceeding 48 h after PPROM. Knowledge of these factors may provide justification for outpatient monitoring of patients presenting with a long cervix, absence of need for tocolysis and persistence of amniotic fluid and, thus, no risk factors after 48 h of admission.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) is a complication responsible for a third of preterm births. Clinical management is initially hospital based, but homecare management is possible if patients are clinically stable 48 h after PPROM. This study set out to determine factors that are predictive of short latency (delivery ≤ 7 days) exceeding 48 h after PPROM, enabling estimation of the prevalence of maternal and neonatal complications and comparison of maternal and fetal outcomes between inpatient and outpatient management.
METHOD
METHODS
This was a monocentric retrospective study conducted between 1 January 2010 and 28 February 2017 on all patients experiencing PPROM at 24 to 34 weeks + 6 days and who gave birth after 48 h. Maternal, obstetric, fetal, and neonatal variables were included in the data collected. The primary endpoint was latency, defined as the number of days between rupture of membranes and delivery.
RESULTS
RESULTS
170 consecutive patients were analyzed. Short latency could be predicted by the need for tocolysis, a cervical length less than 25 mm at admission and the existence of anamnios. Outpatient follow-up was not found to lead to increased maternal morbidity or neonatal mortality.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our study highlights predictive factors of short latency exceeding 48 h after PPROM. Knowledge of these factors may provide justification for outpatient monitoring of patients presenting with a long cervix, absence of need for tocolysis and persistence of amniotic fluid and, thus, no risk factors after 48 h of admission.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33406795
pii: jcm10010150
doi: 10.3390/jcm10010150
pmc: PMC7796089
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Placenta. 1998 Jan;19(1):1-11
pubmed: 9481779
Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018 Dec;46(12):1043-1053
pubmed: 30392988
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013 Apr;53(2):119-24
pubmed: 23216409
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1989 Mar;30(3):257-62
pubmed: 2714507
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 02;(12):CD001058
pubmed: 24297389
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013 Sep;26(14):1455-8
pubmed: 23488655
N Engl J Med. 2000 May 18;342(20):1500-7
pubmed: 10816189
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2008 Jul-Aug;36(7-8):748-56
pubmed: 18603461
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017 May;137(2):180-184
pubmed: 28186639
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;128(2):313-320
pubmed: 27400016
Lancet. 2008 Jan 5;371(9606):75-84
pubmed: 18177778
J Perinatol. 2012 Dec;32(12):970-7
pubmed: 22422118
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1998 Oct;63(1):75-84
pubmed: 9849720
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Feb;164(2):467-71
pubmed: 1992685
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jan;204(1):48.e1-8
pubmed: 21074135
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019 May;236:1-6
pubmed: 30870741
Placenta. 2016 Jun;42:59-73
pubmed: 27238715
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2020 Jan;301(1):61-67
pubmed: 31760462
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009 Nov;22(11):1051-6
pubmed: 19900043
Obstet Gynecol. 1989 Jun;73(6):921-7
pubmed: 2726113
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Feb;184(3):459-62
pubmed: 11228503
Placenta. 2007 Nov-Dec;28(11-12):1099-106
pubmed: 17664005
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016 Mar;29(5):707-20
pubmed: 26373262
J Perinat Med. 2018 Jul 26;46(5):465-488
pubmed: 28710882
J Perinat Med. 1999;27(6):451-7
pubmed: 10732303
Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Mar;135(3):e80-e97
pubmed: 32080050
Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Winter;1(1):11-22
pubmed: 18701929
Placenta. 2006 Nov-Dec;27(11-12):1037-51
pubmed: 16516962
Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018 Dec;46(12):1004-1021
pubmed: 30385352
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2013 Apr;42(2):105-16
pubmed: 23395133
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2016 Mar;45(3):278-84
pubmed: 25847826
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Apr;170(4):1139-44
pubmed: 8166198
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2020 Jan;42(1):51-60
pubmed: 32107766
Postgrad Med J. 1962 Apr;38:193-201
pubmed: 13871927
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2008 Oct;37(6):579-88
pubmed: 18424017