Perinatal Outcomes Based on Number of Digital Exams in Patients with Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membrane

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends speculum exams, rather than digital exams, for evaluation of the cervix after preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM). However, in clinical practice, digital exams may be necessary. We examined whether increasing numbers of digital exams were associated with adverse outcomes in PPROM.This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients admitted between 2019 and 2021 with PPROM at 24 to 34 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was intra-amniotic infection and inflammation (triple I), compared between patients who had ≤1 or ≥2 digital exams during expectant management of PPROM. Secondary outcomes included latency, antepartum events, and other maternal and neonatal morbidities. Groups were compared using univariate analysis and Cox proportional hazards model to account for time between admission and delivery and potential confounders.Of 125 patients included in the analysis, 46 (36.8%) had ≤ 1 and 79 (63.2%) had ≥2 digital exams. There was no significant difference in triple I between groups (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47, 2.26). There were no significant differences in composite maternal or neonatal morbidities or latency from admission to delivery between groups (8 days [interquartile range (IQR): 3, 14] vs. 6 days [IQR: 3, 12]). There was a higher rate of spontaneous labor as the indication for delivery in the group with ≥2 exams (aHR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.04, 4.11).In this retrospective cohort study, ≥2 digital exams during expectant management of PPROM was not associated with change in infectious morbidity or pregnancy latency. There was an increase in spontaneous labor in the group with more digital exams; this may be due to confounding by indication, as patients who are in prodromal labor are more likely to receive digital exams. These results suggest equipoise in exam type in the management of PPROM. · We compared patients with ≤1 or ≥2 digital exams during latency with PPROM.. · There was no difference in rate of triple I with increased number of digital exams.. · There was no difference in latency or other neonatal or maternal morbidities.. · There was an increase in labor as indication for delivery with more digital exams..

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Perinatology
Published
2024-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2435-0774
Primary Topic
Preterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Perinatal Outcomes Based on Number of Digital Exams in Patients with Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membrane

Ebony B. Carter, Nandini Raghuraman, Julia Burd, Amanda C. Zofkie et al.
American Journal of Perinatology
Preterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
article

Perinatal Outcomes Based on Number of Digital Exams in Patients with Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membrane

Ebony B. Carter, Nandini Raghuraman, Julia Burd, Amanda C. Zofkie, Jeannie C. Kelly, Anthony Odibo, Evaline Xie, Antonina I. Frolova
article en

Abstract

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends speculum exams, rather than digital exams, for evaluation of the cervix after preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM). However, in clinical practice, digital exams may be necessary. We examined whether increasing numbers of digital exams were associated with adverse outcomes in PPROM.This was a single-center retrospective cohort study of patients admitted between 2019 and 2021 with PPROM at 24 to 34 weeks of gestation. The primary outcome was intra-amniotic infection and inflammation (triple I), compared between patients who had ≤1 or ≥2 digital exams during expectant management of PPROM. Secondary outcomes included latency, antepartum events, and other maternal and neonatal morbidities. Groups were compared using univariate analysis and Cox proportional hazards model to account for time between admission and delivery and potential confounders.Of 125 patients included in the analysis, 46 (36.8%) had ≤ 1 and 79 (63.2%) had ≥2 digital exams. There was no significant difference in triple I between groups (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47, 2.26). There were no significant differences in composite maternal or neonatal morbidities or latency from admission to delivery between groups (8 days [interquartile range (IQR): 3, 14] vs. 6 days [IQR: 3, 12]). There was a higher rate of spontaneous labor as the indication for delivery in the group with ≥2 exams (aHR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.04, 4.11).In this retrospective cohort study, ≥2 digital exams during expectant management of PPROM was not associated with change in infectious morbidity or pregnancy latency. There was an increase in spontaneous labor in the group with more digital exams; this may be due to confounding by indication, as patients who are in prodromal labor are more likely to receive digital exams. These results suggest equipoise in exam type in the management of PPROM. · We compared patients with ≤1 or ≥2 digital exams during latency with PPROM.. · There was no difference in rate of triple I with increased number of digital exams.. · There was no difference in latency or other neonatal or maternal morbidities.. · There was an increase in labor as indication for delivery with more digital exams..

American Journal of PerinatologyVol. 42(08)
Washington University in St. Louis (US), The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 74%
Preterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.