Expectant management vs. induction in the approach for premature membrane rupture

Section: Originals

How to quote

Martín Marcos L, Abascal Follet D, Chico Rodríguez LM, Rodríguez Matías V, Hernández Marcos C. Manejo expectante frente a inducción en el abordaje de la rotura prematura de membranas. Metas Enferm mar 2019; 22(2):12-20.

Authors

Leticia Martín Marcos1, Dorynn Abascal Follet1, Laura María Chico Rodríguez1, Virginia Rodríguez Matías1, Cristina Hernández Marcos1

Position

1Grado en Enfermería. Especialista en Enfermería Obstétrica-Ginecológica. Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla. Santander

Contact address

Leticia Martín Marcos. C/ San Miguel, 1054. 39310 Miengo (Cantabria)

Contact email: leticia.martin.marcos@gmail.com

Abstract

Objective: to analyze the benefits and risks of expectant management vs. induction in women with pregnancy to term who suffer a premature membrane rupture (PMR), regarding obstetric and neonatal results.
Method: an observational retrospective study, including women with pregnancy to term and PMR and their newborns (NBs), admitted to the Hospital Universitario Marqués de Valdecilla (Santander) from May, 31st, 2106 to June, 1st, 2017. Clinical record data were collected. Pregnant women were classified into three different groups according to delivery management: expectant management, active management, and both managements. The sample was split according to said groups in order to conduct inferential analysis. Statistical significance was considered for p< 0.05.; and the SPSS version 20.0 statistical program was used.
Results: the sample included 464 pregnant women; the sample of NBs who required admission due to complications was of 42. Expectant management was initially used for 81.9% (n= 380), and active management for 17% (n=79). Throughout the delivery process, the initial plan of action was modified in some cases. Of the 380 pregnant women for whom expectant management was initially used, this plan was switched to induction in 47.9% (n= 182); 64.5% of them initiated delivery within the first 12 hours of spontaneous evolution, and 82.8% at 24 hours. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of maternal-fetal morbimortality during the first 24 hours.
Conclusions: both expectant and active management are valid within the first 24 hours of PMR.

Keywords:

Induced labor; Normal delivery; labor; onset of labor; amnion; rupture; chorioamnionitis

Versión en Español

Título:

Manejo expectante frente a inducción en el abordaje de la rotura prematura de membranas

Artículo completo no disponible en este idioma / Full article is not available in this language

Bibliography

  1. Sociedad Española de Ginecología y Obstetricia (SEGO). Rotura Prematura de Membranas. Protocolos Asistenciales en Obstetricia 2012 [internet]. Madrid: SEGO; 2012. [citado 8 feb 2018]. Disponible en: https://es.scribd.com/document/191737080/Actualizacion-Rotura-Prematura-de-Membranas-2012-SEGO
  2. Middleton P, Shepherd E, Flenady V, McBain RD, Crowther CA. Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more). The Cochrane Library 2017. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;1:CD005302. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005302.pub3.
  3. Morgan F. Factores sociodemográficos y obstétricos asociados con rotura prematura de membranas. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2008; 76(8):468-75.
  4. López FA. Ruptura prematura de membranas fetales: de la fisiopatología hasta los marcadores tempranos de la enfermedad. Rev Colomb Obstet Ginecol. 2016; 57(4): 279-90.
  5. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Practice Bulletin: Premature rupture of membranes. Literatura médica 2007; 109(2):141-64.
  6. Scorza WE. Management of prelabor rupture of the fetal membranes at term. UptoDate [internet] 2018. [cited 8 feb 2019]. Available from: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/management-of-prelabor-rupture-of-the-fetal-membranes-at-term
  7. Marowitz A, Jordan R. Midwifery management of prelabor rupture of membranes at term. J Midwifery Womens Health 2007; 52(3):199-206.
  8. Lugones M, Ramírez M. Premature membrane rupture, interesting features for a primary health care. Revista cubana de medicina integral 2010; 26(4):682-93.
  9. González-Merlo JM, Vicens L, Fabre E, González B. Rotura prematura de membranas. Obstetricia. 6ª ed. Madrid: Elsevier; 2013.
  10. Cobo T, Ferrero S, Migliorelli F, Rodríguez A, Lorente N, Baños N, et al. Rotura prematura de membranas a término y pretérmino. Hospital Clinic, Hospital, Sant Joan de Déu, Universitat de Barcelona. Fetal Medicine. Barcelona; 2018.
  11. Barreto F. Rotura prematura de membrana a término: ¿manejo expectante o activo? Matronas Prof. 2006; 7(4):12-6.
  12. Hexia X, Xilian L, Xiaotian L, Huan L, Huan X. The clinical management and outcome of term premature rupture of membrane in East China: results from a retrospective multicenter study. Int J Clin Exp Med 2015; 8(4):6212-7.
  13. Hannah ME, Hodnett ED, Willan A, Foster GA, Di Cecco R, Helewa M. Prelabor rupture of the membranes at term: expectant management at home or in hospital? Obstet Gynecol 2000; 96(4):533-8.
  14. Torres Pita MP. Ruptura prematura de membrana. Grupo Educativo Universidad Privada de Ica 2015. Acceso Libre para la Información Científica para la Innovación (Alicia) [internet]. [citado 8 feb 2019]. Disponible en: https://alicia.concytec.gob.pe/vufind/Record/UPIC_ccfb790806e5e1faca0991068f95604d
  15. Navarro Jiménez NM. Eficacia del manejo expectante por 12 horas vs. la inducción con oxitocina en gestantes con ruptura de membranas a término sin trabajo de parto en el Honadomani San Bartolomé de mayo 2004 a febrero del 2005 [Tesis]. Perú: Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos; 2005. [citado 8 feb 2019]. Disponible en: http://cybertesis.unmsm.edu.pe/bitstream/handle/cybertesis/1964/Navarro_jn.pdf?sequence=1
  16. Yamamoto C, Carrillo T, Erazo C, Cárcamo R, Novoa P, Insunza F, et al. Rotura prematura de membranas al termino: manejo expectante por 24 horas e inducción con oxitocina. Rev. Chil. Obstet. Ginecol 2002; 67(5):349-53.
  17. Li K, Wang Y, Li H, Yang H. A study of 579 pregnant women with premature rupture of membranes at term. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2011; 112(1):45-7.
  18. Norwitz ER, Lye AJ. Biology of parturition. Creasy & Resnick’s Maternal-Fetal Medicine 2017; (6):69-85.
  19. Queensland Clinical Guidelines. Induction of labour. Maternity and Neonatal Clinical Guideline 2017. Queensland Health [internet] [cited 8 feb 2019]. Available from: https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/641423/g-iol.pdf
  20. Sociedad Española de Ginecología y Obstetricia (SEGO). Inducción del parto. Protocolos SEGO. Prog Obstet Ginecol 2015; 58(1):54-64.
  21. Gareth R, Hannah ME, Terri L, Farine D, Ohlsson A, Elaine E, et al. International Multicenter Term PROM Study: Evaluation of predictors of neonatal infection in infants born to patients with premature rupture of membranes at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998; 179(3):635-9.
  22. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Guidance. Intrapartum care for healthy woman and babies. Clinical guideline [CG190]. NICE [internet] 2017. [cited 8 feb 2019]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg190
  23. Baker CJ. Neonatal group B streptococcal disease: Prevention. UpToDate [internet] 2017. [cited 8 feb 2019]. Available from: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/neonatal-group-b-streptococcal-disease-prevention
  24. Leduc D, Biringer A, Lee L, Dy J. Clinical Practice Obstetrics Committee, Society of Obsetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Induction of labour. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2015; 37(4):380-1.
  25. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Practice Bulletin: Induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114:386-97.
  26. Zelli P, Boussat B, Reynaud J, Pons J, Sergent F. Rupture prématurée des membranes à terme sur col défavorable: quel délai pour déclencher? La Revue Sage-Femme 2013; 42(7);671-7.
  27. Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). Recomendaciones de la OMS para la conducción del trabajo de parto [internet]. Ginebra: OMS; 2015. [citado 8 feb 2019]. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/topics/maternal_health/directrices_OMS_parto_es.pdf
  28. Pintucci A, Meregalli V, Colombo P, Fiorilli A. Premature rupture of membranes at term in low risk women: how long should we wait in the “latent phase”? Perinatal Medicine 2014; 42(2):189-96.
  29. Asmama Y, Amina B. Rupture prematurée des membranes à terme: facteurs pronostiques et conséquiences neonatales. Pan Afr Med J 2017; 26:68.
  30. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations. Intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience [internet]. Geneva: WHO; 2018. [cited 8 feb 2019]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/260178/9789241550215-eng.pdf;jsessionid=EFA3A72269C2ECCC63549019E9704B83?sequence=1
  31. Krupa S, Haresh D. Premature rupture of membrane at term: Early induction versus expectant management. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2012; 62(2):172-5.
  32. Graça Krupa F, Cecatti JG, Castro G, Surita F, Milanez HM, Parpinelli MA. Misoprostol versus expectant management in premature rupture of membranes at term. BJOG 2008; 112(9):1284-90.
  33. Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social. Guía de Práctica Clínica sobre la Atención al Parto Normal. Plan de Calidad para el Sistema Nacional de Salud. Agencia de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias del País Vasco (OSTEBA) 2010. [internet] [citado 8 feb 2019]. Disponible en: http://www.guiasalud.es/GPC/GPC_472_Parto_Normal_Osteba_compl.pdf
  34. Larrañaga-Azcárate C, Campo-Molina G, Pérez AF, Ezcurdia MI. Dinoprostone vaginal slow-release system (Propess®) compared to expectant management in the active treatment of premature rupture of the membranes at term: impact on maternal and fetal outcomes. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008; 87(2):195-200.
  35. Mukkharya J, Inamdar S. Term PROM: active versus expectant management. Asian Journal of Science and Technology 2017; 8(2);42244-54.
  36. Seince N, Biquard F, Barjot P. Rupture premature des membranes à terme: quel délai d’expectative? Results d’une etude prospective multicentrique, à propos de 713 cas. J Gynecol Obstet Biol. Reprod 2001; 30(1):42-50.
  37. Ayaz A, Saeed S, Farooq MU, Ahmad F, Bahoo LA, Ahmad I. Pre-labor rupture of membranes at term in patients with an unfavorable cervix: active versus conservative management. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 47(2): 192-6.