FOETOMATERNAL OUTCOME IN PATIENTS WITH OR WITHOUT PREMATURE RUPTURE OF MEMBRANES
Abstract
Background: Preterm premature rupture of membranes is responsible for one third of all preterm birthsand is associated with significant maternal, foetal and neonatal risks. The objectives were to comparethe foeto-maternal outcome in patient with and without preterm premature rupture of membranes.Method: This prospective comparative study was conducted in Gynae-C Unit of Ayub TeachingHospital from Sep 2005 to Mar 2006. Total 170 cases were recruited in the study, out of which 85 hadPreterm Premature Rupture of Membranes (PPROM), and 85 had preterm labour without PROM.Patients’ data were recorded on a performa. Maternal outcome was measured on the basis of presenceof fever and mode of delivery. Foetal outcome was measured on the basis of weight of the baby, andpresence of infection (fever), APGAR score and neonatal death. Analysis was performed using SPSS-10. Results: The primary data arranged in groups was divided into PPROM and no-PPROM groups.The PPROM was found to be frequent in younger age group between 15–25 years while no-PPROMwas common among the age group between 26–35 years (p=0.002). Lower socioeconomic class andhistory of previous one or more preterm delivery was significantly associated with PPROM (p=0.001).Maternal fever was also significant in the PPROM group (p=0.01). Low birth weight was statisticallysignificant in the PPROM group. Majority of the babies born to mother were either extremely low birthweight or low birth weight, i.e., between 1–25 kg p-value 0.005. Low APGAR score at the time ofdelivery (p=0.01) and foetal infection (p=0.002) between the PROM and no-PPROM group was foundto be statistically significant Neo-natal deaths was also higher in the PPROM group as compared to noPPROM group (11 verses 2) (p=0.009). Conclusion: In our study premature rupture of membrane hadincreased neonatal morbidity and mortality as compared to preterm birth. Strategies should bedeveloped for its prevention.Keywords: Preterm Premature rupture of membranes, PPROM, Preterm birthReferences
Simhan HN, Canvan TP. Preterm Premature rupture of
membranes; Diagnosis, evaluation and management strategies.
BJOG 2005;112:32–7.
Denney MJ, Cuhane FJ, Goldenberg LR Prevention of preterm
birth. Women’s Health 2008;4:625–38.
Golden Berg RL, Cuchane JF, Iams J, Romero R. The
epidemiology and etiology of preterm birth. Lancet
;371:75–84.
Morris JM, Roberts CL, Crowther CA, Buchanan Sl;HendersonSmart DJ, Salkeld G. Protocol for the immediate delivery versus
expectant care of woman with preterm prelaboure rupture of
the membranes close to term (PPROMT) trail. BMC Pregnancy
Childbirth 2006;6:9.
Smith G, Rafuse C, Anand N, Brenanan B, Connors G, Crane J,
et al. Prevalence , Management and outcomes of preterm
prelabour rupture of the membranes of women in Canada. J
Obstet Gynecol Can 2005;27:547–53.
Tahir S, Aleem M, Aziz R. Incidence and out come of
preterm premature rupture of membranes. Pak J Med Sci
;18(1):26–32.
Meis JP, Ernest-JM, Moore ML. Causes of low birth weight in
public and private patients. Am J Obstet Gynaecol
;156:1165–8.
Savitz DA, Blackmore CA, Thorp JM; Epidemiologic
characteristics of preterm delivery: Etiologic heterogeneity. Am J
Obstet Gynaecol 1991;164:467–71.
Lamont R Setting up a preterm prevention clicnic A Practical
guide. BJOG 2006;113(suppl 3):86–92.
Tufail A, Hashmi AH, Naheed F Risk Factors for preterm labour
in a Rural Cohort. Med Channel 2009;15(2):55–7.
Ghazi A, Jabbar S, Siddiq MH. Preterm labour–still a challenge.
Pak J Surg 2006;22:222–6.
Gilbert W. The cost of preterm birth the low cost verses high
value of tocolysis BJOG 2006;113(Supll 3):4–9.
Fahim F, Nisa M. Contribution of preterm delivery to perinatal
mortality. J Postgrad Med Inst 2004;18:275–9.
Charles PJ, Muriel R, Charles PJ, Rene E, Olivien C, Pascal G, et
al. A prospective population based study of 598 causes of PROM
between 24 and 34 weeks gestation description management and
morality (Dominos Cohort). Eur J Obstet Gyreacol Reprod Boil
;121:164–70.
Kifah AL Qa Qa, Awaysheh FA. Neonatal outcome and Prenatal
Antibiotics Treatment in Premature Rupture of membranes Pak J
Med Science 2005;21:441–4.
Goldenberg RL, Rouse DJ. Prevention of premature birth. N
Engl J Med 1998;339: 313–20.
Seaward PG. International multicenter term PROM study;
evaluation of predicators of neonatal infection in infants born
to patients with PROM at term. Am J Obstet Gyacol
;179:635–9.
Lewis DF. Antibiotic Therapy in preterm rupture of membranes.
Are seven days necessary? A preliminary randomized clinical
trial. Am J Obstet Gynacol 2003;188:1413–6.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad is an OPEN ACCESS JOURNAL which means that all content is FREELY available without charge to all users whether registered with the journal or not. The work published by J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad is licensed and distributed under the creative commons License CC BY ND Attribution-NoDerivs. Material printed in this journal is OPEN to access, and are FREE for use in academic and research work with proper citation. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad accepts only original material for publication with the understanding that except for abstracts, no part of the data has been published or will be submitted for publication elsewhere before appearing in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. The Editorial Board of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad makes every effort to ensure the accuracy and authenticity of material printed in J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. However, conclusions and statements expressed are views of the authors and do not reflect the opinion/policy of J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad or the Editorial Board.
USERS are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.
AUTHORS retain the rights of free downloading/unlimited e-print of full text and sharing/disseminating the article without any restriction, by any means including twitter, scholarly collaboration networks such as ResearchGate, Academia.eu, and social media sites such as Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Scholar and any other professional or academic networking site.
