DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20210732

Maternal and neonatal outcome in premature rupture of membranes: a retrospective study

Shery Angel Rajakumar, Sindhura Myneni, Ajay Nickson Samuel

Abstract


Background: Premature rupture of membranes (PROM) is one of the most challenging and controversial obstetric dilemma which occur even in low risk pregnancies. This study was done to analyse the maternal and neonatal outcomes in PROM cases.

Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted in the department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, during a period of 3 years from August 2017 to August 2020. All the women who admitted with PROM were included in the study. The data regarding parity, gestational age, number of fetuses, presentation, duration of PROM, PROM to delivery interval, mode of delivery, weight of the baby, NICU admission was collected from the hospital records and analysed.

Results: A total of 115 cases of PROM were recorded. High incidence is found in the age group of 20-30 years. Among them 73.04% were admitted at term. 71.3% were primigravida. 58.26% of them delivered vaginally where as 41.74% delivered by LSCS. Majority of them admitted within 6 hours of PROM. Majority of them delivered within 12 hours of PROM. High APGAR scores in majority of the cases. Most of the babies had birth weight >2.5 kg. 16 babies were admitted in NICU. There was no maternal mortality in our study though we had one neonatal mortality.

Conclusions: Careful identification of present or impending complications and individualizing the management based on gestational age and presence of complications holds good in optimising fetomaternal outcome in PROM.

 


Keywords


APGAR, LSCS, Morbidity, Mortality, NICU, PROM

Full Text:

PDF

References


Arias F, Bhide AG, Arulkumaran S, Damania K, Daftary SN, eds. Arias’ Practical Guide to High Risk Pregnancy and Delivery. 3rd edn. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2012:240-260.

Duff P. Premature rupture of membranes in term patients: induction of labor versus expectant management. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1998;41:883-91.

Gibbs RS, Karlan BY, Haney AF, Nygaard IE. Danforth’s obstetrics and gynecology. 10th edn. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008.

ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 80: premature rupture of membranes. Clinical management guidelines for obstetrician-gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:1007-19.

El-Messidi A, Cameron A. Diagnosis of premature rupture of membranes: inspiration from the past and insights for the future. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010;32:561-9.

Gabbe SG, Niebyl JR, Simpson JL, Landon MB, Galan HL, Jauniaux ER, et al. Obstetrics: normal and problem pregnancies. 7th edn. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2016.

Liu J, Feng ZC, Wu J. The incidence rate of premature rupture of membranes and its influence on fetal-neonatal health: a report from mainland China. J Trop Pediatr. 2010;56:36-42.

Wu J, Liu J, Feng Z, Huang J, Wu G. Influence of premature rupture of membranes on neonatal health. Zhonghua Er Ke Za Zhi Chin J Pediatr. 2009;47:452-6.

Veleminsky M, Sak P. Management of pregnancy with premature rupture of membranes (PROM). J Health Sci Manag Public Health 2006;192-7.

Keirse MJ, Ottervanger HP, Smit W. Controversies: prelabor rupture of the membranes at term: the case for expectant management. J Perinat Med. 1996;24(6):563-72.

Hannah ME, Hodnett ED, Willan A, Foster GA, Di Cecco R, Helewa M, et al. Prelabor rupture of the membranes at term: expectant management at home or in hospital? Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(4):533-8.

Yalınkaya A. Continuous amnioin fusion via an epidural catheter following spontaneous membrane rupture: J Turkish-German Gynecol Assoc. 2013;14:238-41.

Akyol D, Mungan T, Unsal A, Yuksel K. Prelabour rupture of the membranes at term no advantage of delaying induction for 24 hours. A N Z J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;39(3):291-5.

Shah B, Nagar N, Nagar S. A comparative study of labour induction with intravaginal misoprostol versus intravenous oxytocin in premature rupture of membranes beyond 36 weeks gestation. Int J Med Sci Public Health. 2013;2(3):632-5.

Devi A, Rani R. Premature rupture of membranes- a clinical study. J Obstet Gynecol India. 1996;46:63.

Kodkany BS, Telang MA. Premature rupture of membranes. A study of 100 cases. J Obstet Gynaecol. India. 1991;41(4):492-6.

Gandhi M, Shah F, Panchal C. Obstetric outcomes in premature rupture of the membrane (PROM). Internet J Gynecol Obstet. 2012;16(2):1-5.

Patil S, Patil V. Maternal and foetal outcome in premature rupture of membranes. IOSR-J Dent Med Sci. 2014;13(12):56-8310.

Gahwagi MM, Busarira MO, Atia M. Premature rupture of membranes characteristics, determinants, and outcomes of in Benghazi, Libya. Open J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;5(09):494.

Adeniji AO, Atanda OO. Interventions and neonatal outcomes in patients with premature rupture of fetal membranes at and beyond 34 weeks gestational age at a tertiary health facility in Nigeria. J Adv Med Med Res. 2013:1388-97.

Biswas T, Das SK, Kundu S. Preterm prelabour rupture of membranes at 34-37weeks’ gestation: intentional delivery versus expectant management JMSCR.2014;2(6):1348-57.

Bangal VB. Induction of labour versus expectant management for premature rupture of membranes at term. Int J Biomed Res. 2012;3(3):164‐70.

Malik HZ, Khawaja NP, Zahid B, Rehman R. Sublingual versus oral misoprostol for induction of labour in prelabour rupture of membranes at term. J Coll Phys Surg Pak. 2010;20(4):242-5.

Kappy AK. Premature rupture of membranes: a conservative approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979;134 (6):655-61.

Sacks M, Baker TH. Spontaneous premature rupture of the membranes. A prospective study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1967;97(7):888-93.

Russell KP, Anderson GV. The aggressive management of ruptured membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1962;83(7):930-7.

Gunn GC, Mishell DR Jr, Morton DG. Premature rupture of the fetal membranes. A review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1970;106(3):469-83.