4.3 Article

Histological chorioamnionitis and neurodevelopmental outcome in preterm infants

Journal

JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY
Volume 33, Issue 1, Pages 70-75

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/jp.2012.49

Keywords

cerebral palsy; chorioamnionitis; developmental outcomes; infant; preterm

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The objective of this study is to examine the neurodevelopmental outcome at 30 to 42 months corrected age of preterm infants with histological chorioamnionitis (HCA). Study Design: The study design is a retrospective cohort study with a prospective follow-up. All surviving infants with birth gestational age <29 weeks, born between 2000 and 2006, who had a neurodevelopmental assessment at 30 to 42 months corrected age were included. We compared the neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants with or without HCA. Result: Of the 384 infants, 197 (51%) were born to mothers with evidence of HCA. Infants with HCA were of lower gestational age (26 weeks vs 26.6 weeks) and more likely to have intraventricular hemorrhage (27.9% vs 14.4%), periventricular leukomalacia (2.5% vs 0%) and retinopathy of prematurity >= stage 3 (31.4% vs 22.4%). On univariate analysis, infants with HCA were more likely to have cerebral palsy (12.6% vs 6.4%, P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the incidence of cognitive delay, deafness, blindness, or total major disabilities between the two groups. After adjusting for perinatal variables, HCA was associated with increased risk of cerebral palsy (odds ratio (OR): 2.45; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 5.40), but not for total major disabilities (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.64 to 2.34). There was a trend towards increased risk of cerebral palsy with HCA with funisitis. Conclusion: HCA is associated with increased risk of cerebral palsy at 30 to 42 months corrected age in preterm infants. Journal of Perinatology (2013) 33, 70-75; doi:10.1038/jp.2012.49; published online 3 May 2012

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available