Preterm and term prelabour rupture of membranes: A review of timing and methods of labour induction

Delorme, Pierre; Lorthe, Elsa; Sibiude, Jeanne; Kayem, Gilles

doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2021.08.009

Cited by 12 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Those women, induced for NEBI, who delivered vaginally in our study, experimented with a significantly longer TIME respect than women induced for PROM, as already showed by Delorme P et al and Papalia N et al [23,24]. Moreover, in our population nulliparous women presented the same age as the multiparous one.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Induction of Labor According to Medical Indications: A Critical Evaluation through a Prospective Study

Monari¹,

Pellegrini²,

Menichini³

et al. 2022

Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The induction of labor (IOL) is a common obstetric intervention, steadily increasing (one out four pregnancies) in the last years. This procedure should be considered only when there is a medical indication, and when the benefits outweigh the maternal and/or fetal risks of waiting for spontaneous onset of labor. Therefore, this study aims to compare the efficacy of the IOL in terms of induction to delivery time, mode of delivery, and neonatal well-being among different evidence-based and non-evidence-based indications. Methods: This prospective study was conducted at the University Hospital of Modena, between January and December 2020. We included singleton pregnant women undergoing IOL, at the term. Intrauterine deaths, small for gestational age fetuses <5th centile as well women with hypertensive disorders were excluded. Women have been subdivided into 3 groups based on the indication to IOL: premature rupture of membranes (PROM), post-date pregnancy (>41 weeks + 3 days), and non-evidence-based indications (NEBI). The primary outcome is the time occurring between IOL and delivery (TIME), analyzing separately by parity. Moreover, mode of delivery and neonatal wellbeing were evaluated. Results: A total of 585 women underwent IOL in the study period. Overall, the median TIME between IOL and delivery was 19 hours, and the mean cesarean section CS rate was 15.5% (91/585). Pregnancies induced for postdate and non-evidencebased indications registered respectively a significantly higher mean time (p < 0.001), compared with women induced for PROM. This occurred both in nulliparous and multiparous women. Moreover, at multivariate analysis, the IOL TIME ≥24 hours was significantly influenced by Bishop score (p = 0.000) and NEBI (p = 0.02) in nulliparous and by gestational age (p = 0.000) and NEBI (p = 0.02) in multiparous. Moreover, CS rate was significantly influenced by Bishop score (p = 0.003) in nulliparous and by gestational age (p = 0.01) in multiparous. Finally, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission resulted significantly influenced only by gestational age (p = 0.002) in multiparous. Conclusions: Our study confirms that IOL in non-evidence-based indications, leads to an increase in induction to delivery time comparing with women induced for PROM, both in nulliparous and multiparous women, thus it should be justified and carefully evaluated. Further randomized controlled trials (RCT) conducted in European/Italian settings are needed to determine the perinatal outcomes of IOL in non-evidence-based indications.Keywords: induction of labor; non-evidence-based indication; PROM; post-term pregnancy; ARRIVE trial; parity; cesarean section; the time between induction and delivery; NICU admission

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Induction of Labor According to Medical Indications: A Critical Evaluation through a Prospective Study

Monari¹,

Pellegrini²,

Menichini³

et al. 2022

Clin. Exp. Obstet. Gynecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PPROM-PROM is seen in 2-3% of the general population. [ 23 ] In our study, PPROM-PROM was seen in 6.54% of trauma patients, and these rates were considerably higher than those reported for the general population.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 64%

Trauma in pregnancy: An analysis of the adverse perinatal outcomes and the injury severity score

Genc

2023

Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Trauma during pregnancy is one of the most important causes of non-obstetric maternal and fetal mortality and morbidity. The aim of our study is to evaluate the adverse perinatal outcomes that may occur according to the type and severity of the trauma. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, pregnant traumatized women aged 18–50 years and referred for consultation to the Prof. Dr. Cemil Tascıoglu City Hospital’s emergency services of the departments of gynecology and obstetrics, between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2022, were evaluated. Demographic characteristics, trauma findings, Injury Severity Scoring (ISS), and obstetric outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 1825 trauma patients, including 900 pregnants were referred to our emergency gynecology clinic for consultation. One hundred and fifty three pregnant patients, whose birth information we reached, were selected as the study group. The mean age of the patients was 25.56±5.99 years and the mean gestational week at the time of trauma was 21.59±9.89 weeks, the patients had fallen (67.97%), had been exposed to violence (30.07%), and had a traffic accient (1.96%). The patient’s delivery and hospitalization status on the day of trauma, fracture and ISS ≥9 were statistically significantly at a higher rate in the 3rd trimester. Rates of hospitalization and 3rd trimester traumas were found to be significantly higher in the ISS ≥9 group. (P=0.0001, P=0.028, respectively). CONCLUSION: Compared to the general population, the rates of preterm premature rupture of membranes-premature rupture of membranes, fetal death, fetal distress, cesarean delivery, placental abruption, and preterm delivery increased in traumatized pregnant women. Patients with low ISS scores should also be followed closely during pregnancy in terms of perinatal complications, as well as the severe trauma group.

show abstract

“…Prostaglandin E2 appears to work by furthering the breakup of collagen fibers in the cervix, allowing the cervix to soften and efface, allowing the baby to pass through the birth canal more easily. Several studies [6][7][8] have been conducted to determine the efficacy and safety of these two methods of labour induction for women with PROM at term. While both methodologies have been proven to be beneficial in starting labour, some research suggests that vaginal prostaglandin E2 may be associated with a lower risk of hyper stimulation and foetal distress, as well as a reduced number of caesarean section.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Intravenous Oxytocin with Vaginal Prostaglandin E2 for Labor Induction in Pre-Labor Rupture of Membranes at Term

Abbasi¹,

Siddiqui²,

Memon³

et al. 2023

PJMHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Pre-labour rupture of membrane (PROM) at term is one of the most common demonstration for labour induction. PROM is the fissure of membrane before the arrival of orderly uterine shrinkage at term gestation. About 8% of the pregnant women have influence of this condition. PROM also occur when the amniotic sac ehich surround the fetus fissure before the onset of labour leading to the risk of maternal and fetal infection. Study design: It is a randomized and controlled study conducted at Obs and Gynae Department, Civil Hospital, LUMHS, Jamshoro and Divisional Headquarters Teaching Hospital Mirpur Azad Kashmir for the duration of six months from February 2022 to July 2022. Material and Methods: The study comprised of two groups. Each group had 30 patients. The patients that were not fulfilling the inclusion criteria were excluded from the study. The average age of patients in group 1 that is oxytocin induced was 25.4±5.4 years. Patients with prostaglandin E2 induction were included in group2 with average age as 24.7±4.5 years. Group1 had 35.9±4.2 while the average value for group 2 was 36.7±5.3. Results: The induction active labor interval was 5.9±2.1 for Oxytocin induction group while for Prostaglandin E2 induction group the value was 6.3±2.2. Whereas the induction delivery was 14.3±1.9 for Oxytocin induction group and 15.1±2.1 for Prostaglandin E2 induction group. Conclusion: It is concluded that oxytocin is a better drug for labor pain induction as compared to the prostaglandin in case of Pre-labour rupture of membrane at term. To route oxytocin via an intravenous pathway leads to a shorter delivery time and reduced rate of different infections in the mother. Keywords: PROM at term, Intravenous oxytocin and vaginal prostaglandin.

show abstract

Preterm and term prelabour rupture of membranes: A review of timing and methods of labour induction

Cited by 12 publications

References 73 publications

Induction of Labor According to Medical Indications: A Critical Evaluation through a Prospective Study

Induction of Labor According to Medical Indications: A Critical Evaluation through a Prospective Study

Trauma in pregnancy: An analysis of the adverse perinatal outcomes and the injury severity score

Comparison of Intravenous Oxytocin with Vaginal Prostaglandin E2 for Labor Induction in Pre-Labor Rupture of Membranes at Term

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About