Article Publish Status: FREE
Abstract Title:

Induction of Labor versus Expectant Management in Women with Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membranes between 34 and 37 Weeks: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Abstract Source:

PLoS Med. 2012 Apr ;9(4):e1001208. Epub 2012 Apr 24. PMID: 22545024

Abstract Author(s):

David P van der Ham, Sylvia M C Vijgen, Jan G Nijhuis, Johannes J van Beek, Brent C Opmeer, Antonius L M Mulder, Rob Moonen, Mariët Groenewout, Mariëlle G van Pampus, Gerald D Mantel, Kitty W M Bloemenkamp, Wim J van Wijngaarden, Marko Sikkema, Monique C Haak, Paula J M Pernet, Martina Porath, Jan F M Molkenboer, Simone Kuppens, Anneke Kwee, Michael E Kars, Mallory Woiski, Martin J N Weinans, Hajo I J Wildschut, Bettina M C Akerboom, Ben W J Mol, Christine Willekes,

Article Affiliation:

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maastricht University Medical Center, GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht, The Netherlands.


BACKGROUND: At present, there is insufficient evidence to guide appropriate management of women with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM) near term. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial in 60 hospitals in The Netherlands, which included non-laboring women with>24 h of PPROM between 34(+0) and 37(+0) wk of gestation. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1∶1 ratio to induction of labor (IoL) or expectant management (EM) using block randomization. The main outcome was neonatal sepsis. Secondary outcomes included mode of delivery, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), and chorioamnionitis. Patients and caregivers were not blinded to randomization status. We updated a prior meta-analysis on the effect of both interventions on neonatal sepsis, RDS, and cesarean section rate. From 1 January 2007 to 9 September 2009, 776 patients in 60 hospitals were eligible for the study, of which 536 patients were randomized. Four patients were excluded after randomization. We allocated 266 women (268 neonates) to IoL and 266 women (270 neonates) to EM. Neonatal sepsis occurred in seven (2.6%) newborns of women in the IoL group and in 11 (4.1%) neonates in the EM group (relative risk [RR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25 to 1.6). RDS was seen in 21 (7.8%, IoL) versus 17 neonates (6.3%, EM) (RR 1.3; 95% CI 0.67 to 2.3), and a cesarean section was performed in 36 (13%, IoL) versus 37 (14%, EM) women (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.50). The risk for chorioamnionitis was reduced in the IoL group. No serious adverse events were reported. Updating an existing meta-analysis with our trial results (the only eligible trial for the update) indicated RRs of 1.06 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.76) for neonatal sepsis (eight trials, 1,230 neonates) and 1.27 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.65) for cesarean section (eight trials, 1,222 women) for IoL compared with EM. CONCLUSIONS: Inwomen whose pregnancy is complicated by late PPROM, neither our trial nor the updated meta-analysis indicates that IoL substantially improves pregnancy outcomes compared with EM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN29313500 Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Study Type : Meta Analysis

Print Options

Key Research Topics

Sayer Ji
Founder of

Subscribe to our informative Newsletter & get Nature's Evidence-Based Pharmacy

Our newsletter serves 500,000 with essential news, research & healthy tips, daily.

Download Now

500+ pages of Natural Medicine Alternatives and Information.

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

© Copyright 2008-2021, Journal Articles copyright of original owners, MeSH copyright NLM.