Effect of premature rupture of membranes on time to delivery and outcomes in full-term pregnancies with vaginal dinoprostone-induced labour
- 20 Downloads
The aim of this study was to assess the effect of premature rupture of membranes (PROM) in full-term pregnancies with dinoprostone-induced labour.
Patients and methods
This historical cohort study analysed 2166 full-term pregnancies with dinoprostone-induced labour between 1 August 2016 and 30 April 2018. A group that underwent induction of labour for PROM (PROM group) was compared to a group that underwent labour induction for other indications (no-PROM group). Time to delivery and perinatal outcome were compared between the two groups.
A total of 2166 pregnancies (662 PROM and 1504 no-PROM) were included. The two groups demonstrated no significant differences except in biparietal diameter and gestational age (P < 0.001). The caesarean section delivery rate in the PROM group was significantly lower than in the non-PROM group (26.89 vs. 33.58%, P < 0.0001). In the PROM group, the induction-to-delivery time was shorter (P < 0.0001) and the rates of vaginal birth within 24 h (P < 0.0001) and 48 h (P < 0.0001) were higher than those in the control group. The incidence rate of amniotic fluid contamination in the PROM group was significantly lower than that in the non-PROM group (19.18 vs. 25.20%, P = 0.002).
PROM significantly affects perinatal outcome in Chinese women who undergo dinoprostone-induced labour, especially the caesarean delivery rate and the induction-to-delivery time.
KeywordsPremature rupture of membranes Dinoprostone Labour induction Caesarean section Time to delivery
XW designed the study. YL, TJ, YD, YG, QL preformed the experiments. XW, XZ analysed the date. XW wrote the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 6.Lapuente-Ocamica O, Ugarte L, Lopez-Picado A, Sanchez-Refoyo F, Lasa IL, Echevarria O, Álvarez-Sala J, Fariñas A, Bilbao I, Barbero L, Vicarregui J, Hernanz Chaves R, Paz Corral D, Lopez-Lopez JA (2019) Efficacy and safety of administering oral misoprostol by titration compared to vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 19(1):14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Thomas J, Fairclough A, Kavanagh J, Kelly AJ (2014) Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD003101Google Scholar
- 13.DeCherney AH, Nathan L (2013) Current diagnosis & treatment: obstetrics & gynecology. Chapter 14: Late pregnancy complication, section: premature rupture of membranes. McGraw-Hill Medical, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 14.Wojcieszek AM, Stock OM, Flenady V (2014) Antibiotics for prelabour rupture of membranes at or near term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:001807Google Scholar
- 17.Park KH, Hong JS, Ko JK, Cho YK, Lee CM, Choi H, Kim BR (2006) Comparative study of induction of labor in nulliparous women with premature rupture of membranes at term compared to those with intact membranes: duration of labor and mode of delivery. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 32:482–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar