Premature rupture of membrane at term: Early induction versus expectant management

被引：11

作者：

Krupa Shah

Haresh Doshi

机构：

[1] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, B J Medical College

[2] 238, B Type Quarters, Kasturba Medical College Campus, Manipal, Udupi District

来源：

The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India | 2012年 / 62卷 / 2期

关键词：

Expectant management; Induction; Premature rupture of membrane; Term PROM;

D O I：

10.1007/s13224-012-0172-6

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Introduction Premature rupture of membrane is managed either expectantly or actively. The purpose of the study was to assess the effectiveness of early labor induction with cervical prostaglandin E2 versus expectant management in women with term premature rupture of membrane. Material and Methods Singleton pregnancy cases with cephalic presentation reported between 37 and 41 weeks of pregnancy with PROM of 6 h and cervical dilatation 3 cm were studied over a period of 2 years. Out of 100 patients studied, half of them were managed by expectant protocol and the other half by early induction within 6 h of PROM with intracervical gel. Main outcomes measured were PROM-delivery interval, mode of delivery, neonatal and maternal morbidity, and period of maternal and/or neonatal hospitalization. Chi-square test was used to compare frequencies between two groups. Differences between means of other measurement were compared by independent t test. Results PROM-delivery interval was 22 h in expectant group, while in early induction group, it was 13 h (p value0.001). Rate of cesarean section remained almost same in both groups. Increases in maternal-neonatal infection rate and hospital stay were noted in expectant group; however, this was not statistically significant. Conclusion Immediate labor induction with prostaglandin in cases of term PROM shortens delivery interval and maternal hospital stay with reduction in maternal-neonatal sepsis. © Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India 2012.

引用

页码：172 / 175

页数：3

共 8 条

[1]

Larranaga-Azcarate C., Campo-Molina G., Perez-Rodriguez A.F., Et al., Dinoprostone vaginal slow release system compared to expectant management in the active treatment of premature rupture of the membranes at term: Impact on maternal and fetal outcome, Acta obstetrica., 87, pp. 195-200, (2008)

[2]

Duff P., Premature rupture of membranes in term patients: Induction of labor versus expectant management, Clin Obstet Gynecol., 41, pp. 883-91, (1998)

[3]

Ozden S., Delikara M.N., Avci A., Et al., Intravaginal misoprostol vs expectant management in premature rupture of membranes with low bishop scores at term, Int J gynaecol obstet., 77, pp. 109-15, (2002)

[4]

Hoffmann R.A., Anthony J., Fawcus S., Oral misoprostol vs. placebo in the management of prelabor rupture of membranes at term, Int J of gynec obstet., 72, pp. 215-21, (2001)

[5]

Ayaz A., Saeed S., Farooq M.U., Et al., Pre-labor rupture of membranes at term in patients with an unfavorable cervix: Active versus conservative management, Taiwan J obstet gynecol., 47, pp. 192-6, (2008)

[6]

Da Graca Krupa F., Cecatti J.G., De Castro Surita F.G., Et al., Misoprostol versus expectant management in premature rupture of membranes at term, BJOG, 112, pp. 1284-90, (2005)

[7]

Akyol D., Mungan T., Unsal A., Et al., Prelabour rupture of membranes at term: No advantage of delaying induction for 24 hours, Aust N Z J Obstet Gynecol., 39, pp. 291-5, (1999)

[8]

Dare M.R., Middleton P., Crowther C.A., Et al., Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more), Cochrane Database Syst Rev., 1, (2006)

← 1 →