Predictive value of new onset versus primary meconium-stained amniotic fluid.
active labor
cesarean delivery
fetal acidosis
meconium-stained amniotic fluid
neonatal outcomes
Journal
Birth (Berkeley, Calif.)
ISSN: 1523-536X
Titre abrégé: Birth
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8302042
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
03
08
2020
accepted:
25
04
2022
pubmed:
14
5
2022
medline:
11
11
2022
entrez:
13
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Transition of clear amniotic fluid to meconium-stained fluid is a relatively common occurrence during labor. However, data regarding the clinical significance and the prognostic value of the presence of meconium-stained amnionic fluid (MSAF) are scarce. This study aimed to investigate delivery and neonatal outcomes according to the presence of MSAF and the timing of the meconium passage. We used an historical cohort study at a single tertiary medical center in Israel between the years 2011 and 2018. Women were divided into two groups according to timing of meconium passage: primary MSAF (MSAF present at membrane rupture) and secondary MSAF (clear amnionic fluid that transitioned to MSAF during labor). Neonatal complication rates were compared between groups. Composite adverse neonatal outcome was defined as arterial cord blood pH <7.1, 5 min Apgar score ≤7, and/or neonatal intensive care unit admission. The study cohort included 56 863 singleton term births. Of these, 9043 (15.9%) were to women who had primary MSAF, and 1484 (2.6%) to those with secondary MSAF. Secondary MSAF compared with primary MSAF increased the risks of cesarean birth and operative vaginal delivery, increased the risks of low one- and five-minute Apgar scores and low arterial cord blood pH, and increased hospital stay duration. Multivariate analysis revealed that secondary MSAF was independently associated with an increased risk of composite adverse neonatal outcome (OR1.68, 95% CI 1.25-2.24, p < 0.001) compared with primary MSAF. In this sample, secondary MSAF was associated with more adverse neonatal outcomes than primary MSAF. Closer monitoring of fetal well-being may be prudent in these cases.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Transition of clear amniotic fluid to meconium-stained fluid is a relatively common occurrence during labor. However, data regarding the clinical significance and the prognostic value of the presence of meconium-stained amnionic fluid (MSAF) are scarce. This study aimed to investigate delivery and neonatal outcomes according to the presence of MSAF and the timing of the meconium passage.
METHODS
We used an historical cohort study at a single tertiary medical center in Israel between the years 2011 and 2018. Women were divided into two groups according to timing of meconium passage: primary MSAF (MSAF present at membrane rupture) and secondary MSAF (clear amnionic fluid that transitioned to MSAF during labor). Neonatal complication rates were compared between groups. Composite adverse neonatal outcome was defined as arterial cord blood pH <7.1, 5 min Apgar score ≤7, and/or neonatal intensive care unit admission.
RESULTS
The study cohort included 56 863 singleton term births. Of these, 9043 (15.9%) were to women who had primary MSAF, and 1484 (2.6%) to those with secondary MSAF. Secondary MSAF compared with primary MSAF increased the risks of cesarean birth and operative vaginal delivery, increased the risks of low one- and five-minute Apgar scores and low arterial cord blood pH, and increased hospital stay duration. Multivariate analysis revealed that secondary MSAF was independently associated with an increased risk of composite adverse neonatal outcome (OR1.68, 95% CI 1.25-2.24, p < 0.001) compared with primary MSAF.
CONCLUSIONS
In this sample, secondary MSAF was associated with more adverse neonatal outcomes than primary MSAF. Closer monitoring of fetal well-being may be prudent in these cases.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
805-811Informations de copyright
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Hutton EK, Thorpe J. Consequences of meconium stained amniotic fluid: what does the evidence tell us? Early Hum Dev. 2014;90(7):333-339. doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2014.04.005
Burgess AM, Hutchins GM. Inflammation of the lungs, umbilical cord and placenta associated with meconium passage in utero. Review of 123 autopsied cases. Pathol Res Pract. 1996;192(11):1121-1128. doi:10.1016/S0344-0338(96)80029-X
Schrag SJ, Cutland CL, Zell ER, et al. Risk factors for neonatal sepsis and perinatal death among infants enrolled in the prevention of perinatal sepsis trial, Soweto, South Africa. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2012;31(8):821-826. doi:10.1097/INF.0b013e31825c4b5a
Maisonneuve E, Audibert F, Guilbaud L, et al. Risk factors for severe neonatal acidosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118(4):818-823. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31822c9198
Ziadeh SM, Sunna E. Obstetric and perinatal outcome of pregnancies with term labour and meconium-stained amniotic fluid. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2000;264(2):84-87. doi:10.1007/s004040000088
Hiersch L, Krispin E, Aviram A, Wiznitzer A, Yogev Y, Ashwal E. Effect of meconium-stained amniotic fluid on perinatal complications in low-risk pregnancies at term. Am J Perinatol. 2016;33(4):378-384. doi:10.1055/s-0035-1565989
Mazor M, Hershkovitz R, Bashiri A, et al. Meconium stained amniotic fluid in preterm delivery is an independent risk factor for perinatal complications. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1998;81(1):9-13. doi:10.1016/s0301-2115(98)00141-9
Scott H, Walker M, Gruslin A. Significance of meconium-stained amniotic fluid in the preterm population. J Perinatol. 2001;21(3):174-177. doi:10.1038/sj.jp.7200521
Rodríguez Fernández V, López Ramón Y Cajal CN, Marín Ortiz E, Couceiro Naveira E. Intrapartum and perinatal results associated with different degrees of staining of meconium stained amniotic fluid. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;228:65-70. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.03.035
Gluck O, Kovo M, Tairy D, Herman HG, Bar J, Weiner E. The effect of meconium thickness level on neonatal outcome. Early Hum Dev. 2020;142:104953. doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.104953
Tairy D, Gluck O, Tal O, et al. Amniotic fluid transitioning from clear to meconium stained during labor-prevalence and association with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. J Perinatol. 2019;39(10):1349-1355. doi:10.1038/s41372-019-0436-4
Hiersch L, Melamed N, Rosen H, Peled Y, Wiznitzer A, Yogev Y. New onset of meconium during labor versus primary meconium-stained amniotic fluid - is there a difference in pregnancy outcome? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(13):1361-1367. doi:10.3109/14767058.2013.858320
Vain NE, Szyld EG, Prudent LM, Wiswell TE, Aguilar AM, Vivas NI. Oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal suctioning of meconium-stained neonates before delivery of their shoulders: multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2004;364(9434):597-602. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16852-9
Kitsommart R, Thammawong N, Sommai K, Yangnoy J, Bowornkitiwong W, Paes B. Impact of meconium consistency on infant resuscitation and respiratory outcomes: a retrospective-cohort study and systematic review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020;34:1-7. doi:10.1080/14767058.2019.1706476
Balchin I, Whittaker JC, Lamont RF, Steer PJ. Maternal and fetal characteristics associated with meconium-stained amniotic fluid. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(4):828-835. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182117a26
Meis PJ, Hobel CJ, Ureda JR. Late meconium passage in labor--a sign of fetal distress? Obstet Gynecol. 1982;59(3):332-335.
Locatelli A, Regalia AL, Patregnani C, Ratti M, Toso L, Ghidini A. Prognostic value of change in amniotic fluid color during labor. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2005;20(1):5-9. doi:10.1159/000081359
Miller FC, Sacks DA, Yeh SY, et al. Significance of meconium during labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;122(5):573-580. doi:10.1016/0002-9378(75)90052-6
Westgate JA, Bennet L, Gunn AJ. Meconium and fetal hypoxia: some experimental observations and clinical relevance. BJOG. 2002;109(10):1171-1174. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01055.x