4.6 Article

Prediction of labor and delivery by transperineal ultrasound in pregnancies with prelabor rupture of membranes at term

Journal

ULTRASOUND IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 4, Pages 387-391

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/uog.2744

Keywords

cervical length; engagement of fetal head; outcome of labor; PROM; ultrasound

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To evaluate whether engagement of the fetal bead or cervical length in women with premature rupture of membranes (PROM) at term, are associated with time from PROM to delivery or need for operative delivery. Methods A transperineal ultrasound examination was performed in 152 women with a single live fetus in cephalic presentation after PROM (at > 37 gestational weeks). The shortest distance from the outer bony limit of the fetal skull to the skin surface of the perineum was measured in a transverse view, and the cervical length was measured in a sagittal view. The time front PROM to delivery was tested in a Cox regression analysis with ultrasound measurements, parity, maternal age, body mass index and birth weight as possible predictive factors. Results The bead-perineal distance was associated with the time from PROM to delivery (log rank test, P < 0.001). Thirty-six hours after PROM, 32% (95% CI, 15-49) of women with a short bead-perineal distance (< 45 mm) and 43% (95% CI, 24-62) of women with a long distance (>= 45 mm) were still in labor. Women with a short bead-perineal distance bad fewer Cesarean sections, less use of epidural analgesia and a shorter time in active labor, and their babies bad a higher pH in the umbilical artery. The measured cervical length was not associated independently with time to delivery. Conclusion Transperineal ultrasound measurements of fetal bead engagement may help clinicians to predict the course of labor in women with PROM. Copyright (c) 2006 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available