Literature DB >> 30553135

Intentional early delivery versus expectant management for preterm premature rupture of membranes at 28-32 weeks' gestation: A multicentre randomized controlled trial (MICADO STUDY).

Jean-Charles Pasquier1, Olivier Claris2, Muriel Rabilloud3, René Ecochard3, Jean-Charles Picaud4, Stéphanie Moret5, Danielle Buch6, Georges Mellier5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Preterm premature rupture of fetal membranes (PPROM) exposes the fetus to preterm birth, and optimal timing for delivery is controversial. The aim of this study was to compare intentional early delivery ("active management") with expectant management in very preterm birth (28-32 weeks). STUDY
DESIGN: We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial with intent-to-treat analysis, at 19 tertiary-care hospitals in France and 1 in Geneva, Switzerland. Inclusion criteria were women age ≥18 years, PPROM at 280/7 to 316/7 weeks' gestation, singleton pregnancy. Exclusion criteria were maternal/fetal indications for immediate delivery. All participants received prophylactic antibiotics (amoxicillin + gentamicin) and two doses of corticosteroids. Women in expectant management delivered at 34 weeks, sooner if medically indicated. Women in active management delivered 24 h after the second steroid dose. The primary outcome measure was a composite of neonatal death/severe adverse events: periventricular leukomalacia, intraventricular hemorrhage, sepsis, oxygen requirement at 36 weeks, and necrotizing enterocolitis. The secondary outcome was clinical chorioamnionitis.
RESULTS: The trial was stopped prematurely, due to recruitment difficulties. Of 360 women assessed, 139 (40% of calculated sample size) were randomized: 70 to expectant management, 69 to active management. Mean gestational age at PPROM was similar in both groups (30 ± 1.3 vs. 30.2 ± 1.2 weeks, respectively). There were 35 cases of medical/suspected complications requiring delivery in expectant management vs. 4 in active management. Mean latency between PPROM and delivery was 11.7 ± 9.8 vs. 2.8 ± 0.6 days, respectively; P < 0.0001 (median 8.4 (1.8-44.2) vs. 2.7 (1.9-4.3)). There were more caesarean deliveries in active than expectant management (80% vs. 60%, respectively; P < 0.01). There were 2 chorioamnionitis cases, both in expectant management. One baby died in expectant management; 2 in active management (one with heart defect). There was no significant difference in sepsis rates. The combined neonatal death/severe adverse events measure was 12.9% for expectant management and 13.0% for active management (OR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.33-2.93, P = 0.97).
CONCLUSION: For PPROM at 28-32 weeks, and with antenatal antibiotic and steroid therapy, there were no observed differences in neonatal health when comparing expectant management to early delivery. As expected, expectant management resulted in higher gestational age and birth weight. However, our study was underpowered to draw firm and reliable conclusions.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chorioamnionitis; Expectant management; Intentional early delivery; Preterm birth; Preterm premature rupture of membranes

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30553135     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.11.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol        ISSN: 0301-2115            Impact factor:   2.435


  3 in total

1.  Neonatal outcomes in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes at periviable gestational age.

Authors:  Jacky Herzlich; Laurence Mangel; Ariel Halperin; Daniel Lubin; Ronella Marom
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  General Guidelines in the Management of an Obstetrical Patient on the Labor and Delivery Unit during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Angela J Stephens; John R Barton; Nana-Ama Ankumah Bentum; Sean C Blackwell; Baha M Sibai
Journal:  Am J Perinatol       Date:  2020-04-28       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Developing a Core Outcome Set for the Evaluation of Antibiotic Use in Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: A Systematic Review and Semi-Structured Interview.

Authors:  Dan Liu; Lin Wu; Jiefeng Luo; Siyu Li; Yan Liu; Chuan Zhang; Linan Zeng; Qin Yu; Lingli Zhang
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 5.988

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.