Preterm and Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes (PPROM and PROM) (2024)

Continuing Education Activity

Prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) occurs when the fetal membranes rupture before the onset of labor contractions. This condition can lead to spontaneous labor or, if labor does not begin, increase the risk of complications such as intraamniotic infection and placental abruption, particularly at term. When PROM occurs before 37 weeks gestation, it is classified as preterm PROM (PPROM), posing unique challenges in managing the risk of prematurity alongside potential complications for the mother and child. PROM can arise from various causes, including membrane weakening, intraamniotic pressure, infection, and other stressors—with risk factors like a history of PROM, short cervical length, and certain lifestyle factors. Management depends largely on gestational age, with delivery often recommended after 37 weeks and more conservative approaches taken for PPROM to balance fetal development with the risk of infection.

This activity for healthcare professionals enhances participants' competence in identifying PROM and PPROM risk factors, accurately assessing clinical presentations, and utilizing the latest evaluation and management protocols. Learners gain insights into implementing strategies considering gestational age and maternal-fetal health, such as corticosteroid administration, antibiotics, and expectant management in PPROM cases to reduce neonatal risks. Additionally, the course emphasizes the importance of interprofessional collaboration with obstetricians, neonatologists, and nurses to deliver comprehensive care, thus optimizing outcomes for mothers and neonates.

Objectives:

Assess gestational age and fetal lung maturity to determine the safest course of action regarding delivery or expectant management.
Apply current guidelines for monitoring fetal well-being and signs of infection during conservative management of prelabor rupture of membranes.
Select appropriate timing for delivery based on maternal and fetal status, balancing risks and benefits to minimize complications.
Apply interprofessional team strategies to improve care coordination and outcomesin patients with prelabor rupture of membranes.

Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.

Introduction

Prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) is defined as the rupture of the fetal membranes before the onset of labor contractions. When PROM occurs before 37 weeks gestation, the term preterm PROM (PPROM) is used.[1] Spontaneous labor often follows the rupture of membranes (ROM). At term, a delay in the onset of labor following ROM increasesthe risk of obstetric complications such as intraamniotic infection and placental abruption. PPROM is a complicated condition where clinicians must balance the risks of prolonging pregnancy with fetal risks of prematurity.

Management of PPROM in the previable and periviable periods can be especially complicated, dependingon gestational age, with immediate delivery often recommended after 37 weeks. However, in cases of PPROM, expectant management, corticosteroids, antibiotics, and sometimes tocolytics may be used to extend pregnancy when possible to reduce neonatal risks. Understanding the latest recommendations and the evidence supporting them is essential for clinicians and patients to make informed decisions regarding their care and optimize maternal and fetal outcomes.

Etiology

Pathophysiology of Premature Rupture of Membranes

The fetal membranes play a critical role during gestation, providing mechanical and immunologic protection for the developing fetus. The fetal membranes are made up of 2 layers: the amnion, which is the inner layer, and the chorion, which is the outer membrane connected to the decidual layer of the endometrium. Therefore, the amnion responds to changes within the amniotic cavity, while the chorion plays an important role in immune tolerance at the maternal-fetal interface.[2]The amnion and chorion are connected by the twelfth week of gestation by a strong yet flexible extra-cellular matrix comprised of various collagen types, providing the membranes' structural framework.[2][3]At the end of gestation, significant membrane remodeling occurs due to programmed activation of matrix metalloproteinases and selective apoptosis, leading to significant weakening of the membranes.[4]Interestingly, tumor necrosis factor α or interleukin 1β induces the same biochemical markers of membrane weakening and apoptosis seen at the end of gestation.[4]

Etiologyof Premature Rupture of Membranes

PROM or PPROM may occur for various reasons, including normal physiologic weakening of the membranes at term, increased intraamniotic pressure,intraamniotic infection or inflammation, oxidative stress, and membrane remodeling capacity abnormalities.[1][2][5]Inflammation can activate proteases that degrade collagen within the fetal membranes, weakening and predisposing them to rupture. Intrauterine infection is also a common cause of inflammation. However, whileintraamniotic infection is seen in a significant proportionof patients with PPROM, it may be either a cause or a result of membrane weakening. For example, while an ascending genital infection from bacterial vaginosis can certainly cause an innate inflammatory response, sterile inflammation from bleeding or tobacco use may also weaken the fetal membranes, allowing for microbial invasion.[2][6]

Oxidative stress generates reactive oxygen species, which can target and degrade collagen. Reactive oxygen species are most commonly produced during cellular respiration and when they are released by immune cells during phagocytosis. Typically, these reactive oxygen species are balanced by antioxidants. However, the reactive oxygen species and antioxidants can become imbalanced due to dietary deficiencies of antioxidants, tobacco use, and high fetoplacental energy demands, including those seen in pregnancies at high altitudes or with concordant intrinsic microvascular disease.[2]Additionally, evidence demonstrates that some single-nucleotide polymorphisms involved in the metabolism of the extracellular matrix can significantly affect the risk of PPROM.[7]However, despite various underlying etiologies, no apparent cause is often identified in patients presenting with PROM and PPROM.

Risk Factorsof Premature Rupture of Membranes

Risk factors for PPROM include:

A history of PPROM
Short cervical length
Second- or third-trimester vaginal bleeding
Amniocentesis and other antenatal intrauterine procedures
Uterine overdistension
Connective tissue disorders
Congenital uterine anomalies
Nutritional deficiencies of copper and ascorbic acid
Low body mass index
Low socioeconomic status
Cigarette smoking and recreational drug use[1][5][6][8][9]

Epidemiology

PROM complicates approximately 8% of term pregnancies. After PROM at term, spontaneous labor begins within 24 hours in 60% to 70% of patients and within 72 hours in over 95%.[10] In the TERMPROM study, a large prospective randomized controlled trial comparing expectant management to immediate induction of labor, the median time to delivery in the expectant management group was approximately 33 hours.[10]Preterm PROM is less common, complicating only about 1% of deliveries overall. Previable and periviable PPROM occurring before 24 weeks gestation occurs in 0.3% to 0.4% of pregnancies.[11]Black women are twice as likely than White women to experience PPROM and are more than 6 times as likely to experience recurrent PPROM.[12]

History and Physical

Clinical History

Patients with ruptured membranes willclassically present with vaginal fluid leakage. Leakage may be significant and continuous or much lighter and intermittent. Some patients may describe their symptoms as an increase in watery discharge. By definition, patients with PROM or PPROM are not in active labor, so regular uterine contractions are absent before membrane rupture.

When obtaining the clinical history, clinicians should inquire about contractions that may indicate the onset of labor, vaginal bleeding (may suggest placental abruption), and fetal movement to assess fetal well-being. Furthermore, additional details regarding ROM should be obtained, including the onset of suspected membrane rupture as prolonged ROM increases risks, the volume of fluid loss observed, and the color and odor of the fluid, which can suggest the presence of meconium or intraamniotic infection. Associated features, including pain, recent sexual encounters, recent trauma, and recent physical activity, are also vital to a thorough history.

Physical Examination

A sterile speculum exam should be performed to assess the fluid. Direct observation of fluid leakage from the cervical os confirms ROM. Pooling, which refers to the rapid collection of amniotic fluid in the lower blade of the speculum, may also be seen. If leakage of amniotic fluid from the os is not seen, gentle fundal pressure can be applied, or the patient can be asked to Valsalva or cough to provoke fluid leakage. The color and odor of the fluid should be noted. A fluid sample can also be obtained for further evaluation if the diagnosis is in question.

During the speculum exam, dilation and effacement of the cervix should be visually assessed. Digital examinations increase the risk of intraamniotic infection in patients with ROM; digitalexaminations to assess cervical dilation, effacement, and station should be avoided unless delivery appears imminent or the patient appears to be in active labor.[13][14][15]Patients should also be inspected for any signs of cervicitis, vaginitis, vaginal bleeding, and umbilical cord or fetal prolapse. One of the most significant potential complications of PROM and PPROM is intrauterine infection. Therefore, all patients presenting with PROM should be assessed for signs and symptoms of intrauterine infection, which include maternal fever, fetal tachycardia, such as a fetal heart rate 160 bpm or more for at least 10 minutes, uterine tenderness, and purulent or foul-smelling discharge.[16][17]

Evaluation

Confirming the Diagnosis of Rupture of Membranes

Direct visualization of fluid leakage from the cervical os or gross pooling confirms the diagnosis. However, if the diagnosis is still in question after a sterile speculum examination, additional testing can help confirm the diagnosis.

Microscopy

A sample of amniotic fluid can be smeared directly on a slide and allowed to dry. When examined microscopically, dried amniotic fluid forms a crystalized pattern that appears like branches of a fern tree; this is known as arborization or ferning and confirms ROM. Of note, cervical mucus can also produce a crystallized pattern.However, cervical mucus formsfern-like patterns in thick linear bands secondary to its stringlike macroscopic structure (Spinnbarkeit). This crystallized pattern is visually distinct from amniotic fluid, which tends to form a thinner, more delicate pattern across the entire smear.

Vaginal fluid pH testing

A pH test can be performed on vaginal fluid. The pH of amniotic fluid is typically slightly basic, with a range of 7 to 7.4, while normal vaginal secretions in pregnancy have a pH between 3.8 and 4.[18][19] False-positive pH tests, however, are common, as multiple other causes of abnormally high vaginal pH may be present, including the presence of blood or semen, alkaline antiseptics, and bacterial vaginosis. Additionally, false-negative results may occur with prolonged rupture of membranes or minimal amounts of leakage. For these reasons, pH testing is reasonable to include as part of the evaluation for ROM, but it does not definitively confirm or exclude the diagnosis.

Diagnostic tests for amniotic fluid proteins

Several commercially available tests candetect the presence of amniotic fluid proteins within a sample. The proteins detected in some of the most commonlyused tests are placental alpha microglobulin-1 and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (IGFBP-1). One test assesses for the combination of IGFBP-1 and alpha-fetoprotein. The sensitivity of these tests in diagnosing ROM ranges from about 95% to 99% compared to around 85% for conventional methods.[20][21][22]

Treatment / Management

Management of prelabor rupture of membrane cases is determined by gestational age at the time of membrane rupture (see Table. Summary of Management for Patients with Ruptured Membranes Based on Gestational Age). Gestational age guides the decision regarding immediate delivery versus expectant management and the need for corticosteroids with or without proephylactic tocolytics, latency antibiotics, GBS prophylaxis, and magnesium sulfate for neuroprotection. However, regardless of gestational age, immediate delivery is indicated for signs of nonreassuring fetal status, intraamniotic infection, placental abruption, and prolapsed umbilical cord.

Table

Table. Summary of Management for Patients with Ruptured Membranes Based on Gestational Age.

GBS: group BStreptococcus

*Only if GBS is negative.

**Other indications include previous neonate with GBS disease; GBS bacteriuria at any time during the current pregnancy; GBS unknown with at least 1 of the following risk factors: ROM for 18 or more hours, the intrapartum temperature of 38.0 °C (100.4 °F) or higher, GBS positive in a prior pregnancy.[24]

Management Approach in Early Term and Term Patients (37 0/7 Weeks Gestation and Greater)

Immediately moving toward delivery after a diagnosis of PROM at term is associated with better maternal and fetal outcomes compared to expectant management.[25]For example, the TERMPROM trial, which compared expectant management with immediate induction of labor (IOL), showed that despite similar rates of cesarean birth and neonatal infection between the 2 groups, immediate IOL was associated with lower rates of maternal infection.[10]American, British, and Australian/New Zealander guidelines all generally concur and recommend initiatingIOL or performing a cesarean delivery if indicated immediately in patients who are GBS-positive or within 24 hours of PROM if GBS-negative or unknown.[1][15]GBS prophylaxis should be administered as indicated.[1][15]

Multiple studies have examineddifferent methods of labor induction in patients with PROM. Notably, evidence suggests that intracervical cathetersshould be avoided in patients with ruptured membranes, as they have been shown to nearly double the risk ofintraamniotic infection compared with pharmacologic induction methods.[26][27]While oxytocin can be used alone for IOL in patients with PROM at term, there is no convincing evidence to support or avoid the use of prostaglandins for cervical ripening in this population. A Cochrane review from 2000 found that there appears to be an increased risk of intraamniotic infection with prostaglandins compared with oxytocin alone.[28]However, a2005 meta-analysis showed that misoprostol was comparable to oxytocin as initial management forIOL, with similar rates of vaginal birth within 12 and 24 hours and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes.[29]Additionally, results from several small studies have shown a modest benefit to cervical ripening with prostaglandins in patients with term PROM and an unfavorable cervix.[30]At this time, the choice of whether to use a prostaglandin or oxytocin for cervical ripening in patients withterm PROM and an unfavorable cervix can be individualized and based on clinical factors in concert with clinician and patient preference.

Management Approach in Preterm Patients (36 6/7 or Fewer Weeks Gestation)

Management varies slightly between patients with PPROM before and after the 34-week gestation threshold. However, a single course of corticosteroids is recommended for all pregnant patients with PPROM betweenviabilityand 36 6/7 weeks gestation if delivery is anticipated before 37 weeks.[1]Antenatal corticosteroids after PPROM have been shown to reduce neonatal mortality, respiratory distress syndrome, necrotizing enterocolitis, and intraventricular hemorrhage.[31][32][33][34]

Late preterm (34 0/7 to 36 6/7 weeks gestation)

Immediate delivery is indicated if the patient is GBS-positive. However, if the patient is GBS negative or unknown, expectant management may be considered until 37 weeks. Study results have shown that immediate delivery is associated with higher rates of neonatal respiratory distress (8% versus 5%) and longer stays in intensive care (4 days versus 2 days). Expectant management is associated with lower rates of cesarean birth but increased rates ofintraamniotic infection and antepartum hemorrhage.[35][36]Given these mixed results, thorough counseling, individualized care, and shared decision-making are recommended.[1][15] Corticosteroids are recommended, but latency antibiotics and tocolytics are not. Patients who are GBS unknown should be screened for GBS with a rectovaginal swab and started on GBS prophylaxis, which can be discontinued if the culture returns negative.[24]

Generally, patients with preterm PROM undergoing expectant management should be admitted to the hospital with periodic assessments for fetal well-being, preterm labor, infection, placental abruption, and umbilical cord prolapse. Fetal well-being is typically monitored with regular cardiotocographic monitoring or biophysical profiles and serial growth ultrasounds. Maternal vital signs should be checked regularly, and a rise in temperature should raise suspicion of intraamniotic infection. However, in the absence of clinical signs of infection, monitoring leukocyte counts and inflammatory markers is not indicated; while leukocytosis and elevated inflammatory markers are often seen with intraamniotic infection, these findings are nonspecific and have not been shown to help diagnoseintraamniotic infection in the absence of other clinical signs or symptoms.[16]Additionally, corticosteroids will cause transient leukocytosis, making this finding difficult to interpret.

Early preterm (24 0/7 to 33 6/7 weeks gestation)

Expectant management is recommended when no maternal or fetal contraindications exist. Latency antibiotics, a single course of corticosteroids, and GBS prophylaxis(unless known to be GBS-negative) are also all recommended.[1][15][24]To reduce the risk of cerebral palsy, intrapartum magnesium sulfate is recommended between viability and 31 6/7 weeks gestation according to American guidelines and between 24 and 29 6/7 weeks gestation according to British guidelines.[37][38]Like patients in the late preterm with PPROM, patients in the early preterm period are usually monitored in the hospital and regularly assessed for signs of nonreassuring fetal well-being, preterm labor, and infection.

Latency antibiotics have been shown to prolong pregnancy in patients with PPROM, reduce maternal and neonatal infections, and reduce fetal morbidity. A 7-daycourse of therapy is recommended in patients with PPROM before 34weeks gestation. The recommended regimen is intravenous ampicillin 2 g every 6 hours and erythromycin 250 mg every 6 hours for 48 hours, followed by oral amoxicillin 250 mg every 8 hours and erythromycin base 333 mg every 8 hours for 5 additional days.[1][39]Azithromycin can be used as an alternative to erythromycin.[40] Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid is not recommended due to increased rates of necrotizing enterocolitis.[1][41]If the patient is a candidate for GBS prophylaxis, she should receive a regimen that covers GBS.[42]

The use of tocolytics in patients with preterm PROM is controversial but can be considered for up to 48 hours in patients before 34 weeks gestation to allow the fetus to reap the full benefits of a corticosteroid course.[1]Prophylactic tocolytics may be associated with an extended latency period and a lower delivery risk within 48 hours. However, tocolytics are also associated with a higher risk of intrauterine infectionbefore 34 weeks. No significant maternal or neonatal benefit has been shown with tocolytics beyond benefits attributed to a complete course of corticosteroids.[43]

Previable and periviable (<24 weeks of gestation)

The periviable period is defined as the time between 20 and 25 6/7 weeks gestation.[44]The American Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine recommends thorough, individualized counseling about the maternal and fetal risks associated with the patient's situation and offering patients with previable and periviablePPROM abortion care.[45]Expectant management can be considered in the absence of contraindications to ongoing pregnancy, which includes intraamniotic infection, placental abruption, cord prolapse, and nonreassuring fetal status.

Significant maternal risks of expectant management include potentially severe infection, hemorrhage, and death. Results from a 2022 retrospective cohort of patients with PPROM between 14 and 24 weeks gestation by Sklar et al showed composite maternal morbidity rates of 60% in the expectant management group compared with only 33% in the abortion care group (see Table.Maternal Morbidity After Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes at <24 Weeks' Gestation).[11]

Table

Table. Maternal Morbidity After Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes at <24 Weeks' Gestation.

Clinicians should note that maternal sepsis can progress rapidly to death. For example, a study on maternal mortality in France provided results that found the median interval from PPROM to the first signs of infection was 5 days; the median time from infection diagnosis to death was only 18 hours.[46]A delay in uterine evacuation was determined to have contributed to at least some of the deaths in that series.

Notably, expectant management inpreviable and periviable situationsis generally not associated with positive neonatal outcomes. In a European series of patients known as the PPROMEXIL-III cohort, 52 of 86 (60%) patients with previable PROM were delivered before 24 weeks, and only23 neonates survived until discharge. Long-term data showed that 13 of these children (15% of the original 86) had normal neurodevelopment at 2 and 5 years.[47]This is similar to the results reported by Sklar et al, who found only 15.7% of women in the expectant management group avoided morbidity and had a neonate who survived until discharge.[11]

Given these risks, the decision to proceed with abortion care versus expectant management should consider the ability of theclinicians to care for the pregnant person and their neonate, the fetal prognosis, the "views of risk"as determined by both the healthcare team and the patient, and patient preference.[45]In patients who chose abortion care, dilation and evacuation are associated with substantially lower risks of hemorrhage, infection, and retained tissue than induction of labor.[48]In patients who undergo expectant management, latency antibiotics can be considered as early as 20 0/7 weeks gestation, whileGBS prophylaxis, corticosteroids, tocolysis, and magnesium sulfatearenot recommended until the time when neonatal resuscitation would be considered, which is typically between 22 and 24 weeks gestation, depending on local resources.[45]

Differential Diagnosis

The differential diagnosis of fluid leaking from the vagina includes:

Vaginitis
Lower urinary tract infection
Urinary incontinence
Fluids from recent intercourse
Vesicovaginal fistula
Trauma to the urogenital tract

These alternative diagnoses can be ruled out with a proper history, physical examination, and basic diagnostic tests, such as a urinalysis and microscopic evaluation of vaginal secretions using potassium hydroxide and wet mount preparations.

Prognosis

Prognosis is largely dependent on the gestational age at which membrane rupture occurs. After PROM at term, outcomes are generally favorable. Birth within 7 days of membrane rupture occurs in at least 50% of patients with PPROM. Although rare, cessation of fluid leakage with restoration of normal amniotic fluid volume and favorable outcomes is possible.[49][50][51]The risk of complications in PPROM is relatively high. As the latency period lengthens, the risk of maternal infection increases, but neonatal complications associated with extreme prematurity decrease.

Regarding periviable PPROM, neonatal survival rates are much higher when PPROM occurs after 22 weeks (58%) thanwhen PPROM occurs before 22 weeks gestation (14% to 22%).[52][53] In a European series of patients known as the PPROMEXIL-III cohort, 52 of 86 (60%) patientswith previable PROM delivered before 24 weeks gestation, and only23 neonates survived until discharge. Long-term data showed that 13 of these children (15% of the original 86) had normal neurodevelopment at 2 and 5 years.[47]Women with a history of PPROM have a higher risk of recurrent PPROM and preterm birth. Progesterone supplementation should be offered in future pregnancies to reduce the risk of spontaneous preterm birth.[54]

Complications

Maternal Risks

Maternal complications associated with PROMinclude:

Intrauterine infection
Sepsis
Placental abruption
Antenatal, intrapartum, and postpartum hemorrhage
Death

Fetal and Neonatal Risks

Fetal and neonatal complications associated with PROM include:

Neonatal sepsis
Complications of prematurity
- Respiratory distress syndrome
- Intraventricular hemorrhage
- Necrotizing enterocolitis
- Retinopathy of prematurity
- Hypothermia
- Glucose and electrolyte abnormalities
- Failure to thrive
- Death
Complications of prolonged oligohydramnios
- Pulmonary hypoplasia
- Limb contractures and skeletal deformities[1][52]

Consultations

Coordination between obstetric and pediatric services is essential to optimize neonatal care, especially in patients who deliver preterm, have prolonged rupture of membranes, and have other obstetric complications, eg, intraamniotic infection or placental abruption. Patients who experience PPROM can benefit from meeting with neonatal clinicians before delivery to understand the prognosis of their child. In the previable or periviable periods, these conversations can help patients choose whether they want to pursue abortion care or expectant management.

Deterrence and Patient Education

Patients should be instructed to present for evaluation if they ever experience leakage of fluid during pregnancy, as PPROM or PROM must always be ruled in these situations due to the increasing risk of complications associated with a delayed diagnosis.

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

PROM requires immediate and coordinated action among a diverse healthcare team to ensure optimal patient-centered care and outcomes. Accurate diagnosis and gestational age assessment are pivotal, and while obstetricians or midwives typically manage PROM, care coordination is crucial. Nurses play a vital role in monitoring patients for signs of infection, placental abruption, or fetal distress, ensuring timely interventions when necessary. Pharmacists contribute by ensuring appropriate medication management, such as antibiotics and corticosteroids. Pediatric and anesthesiology teams must be kept informed of all preterm cases and ready to provide neonatal or obstetric support. Effective interprofessional communication ensures safety, enhances team performance, and improves maternal and fetal outcomes.

Review Questions

References

1.: Siegler Y, Weiner Z, Solt I. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 217: Prelabor Rupture of Membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Nov;136(5):1061. [PubMed: 33093409]
2.: Menon R, Richardson LS. Preterm prelabor rupture of the membranes: A disease of the fetal membranes. Semin Perinatol. 2017 Nov;41(7):409-419. [PMC free article: PMC5659934] [PubMed: 28807394]
3.: Mossman HW. Classics revisited: Comparative morphogenesis of the fetal membranes and accessory uterine structures. Placenta. 1991 Jan-Feb;12(1):1-5. [PubMed: 2034592]
4.: Moore RM, Mansour JM, Redline RW, Mercer BM, Moore JJ. The physiology of fetal membrane rupture: insight gained from the determination of physical properties. Placenta. 2006 Nov-Dec;27(11-12):1037-51. [PubMed: 16516962]
5.: Bouvier D, Forest JC, Blanchon L, Bujold E, Pereira B, Bernard N, Gallot D, Sapin V, Giguère Y. Risk Factors and Outcomes of Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes in a Cohort of 6968 Pregnant Women Prospectively Recruited. J Clin Med. 2019 Nov 15;8(11) [PMC free article: PMC6912547] [PubMed: 31731659]
6.: Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, Romero R. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet. 2008 Jan 05;371(9606):75-84. [PMC free article: PMC7134569] [PubMed: 18177778]
7.: Romero R, Friel LA, Velez Edwards DR, Kusanovic JP, Hassan SS, Mazaki-Tovi S, Vaisbuch E, Kim CJ, Erez O, Chaiworapongsa T, Pearce BD, Bartlett J, Salisbury BA, Anant MK, Vovis GF, Lee MS, Gomez R, Behnke E, Oyarzun E, Tromp G, Williams SM, Menon R. A genetic association study of maternal and fetal candidate genes that predispose to preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Oct;203(4):361.e1-361.e30. [PMC free article: PMC2989662] [PubMed: 20673868]
8.: Mercer BM, Goldenberg RL, Meis PJ, Moawad AH, Shellhaas C, Das A, Menard MK, Caritis SN, Thurnau GR, Dombrowski MP, Miodovnik M, Roberts JM, McNellis D. The Preterm Prediction Study: prediction of preterm premature rupture of membranes through clinical findings and ancillary testing. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Sep;183(3):738-45. [PubMed: 10992202]
9.: Panagiotopoulos M, Tseke P, Michala L. Obstetric Complications in Women With Congenital Uterine Anomalies According to the 2013 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology and the European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy Classification: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Jan 01;139(1):138-148. [PubMed: 34856567]
10.: Hannah ME, Ohlsson A, Farine D, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED, Myhr TL, Wang EE, Weston JA, Willan AR. Induction of labor compared with expectant management for prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. TERMPROM Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1996 Apr 18;334(16):1005-10. [PubMed: 8598837]
11.: Sklar A, Sheeder J, Davis AR, Wilson C, Teal SB. Maternal morbidity after preterm premature rupture of membranes at <24 weeks' gestation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Apr;226(4):558.e1-558.e11. [PubMed: 34736914]
12.: Shen TT, DeFranco EA, Stamilio DM, Chang JJ, Muglia LJ. A population-based study of race-specific risk for preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Oct;199(4):373.e1-7. [PubMed: 18667175]
13.: Alexander JM, Mercer BM, Miodovnik M, Thurnau GR, Goldenberg RL, Das AF, Meis PJ, Moawad AH, Iams JD, Vandorsten JP, Paul RH, Dombrowski MP, Roberts JM, McNellis D. The impact of digital cervical examination on expectantly managed preterm rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Oct;183(4):1003-7. [PubMed: 11035354]
14.: Seaward PG, Hannah ME, Myhr TL, Farine D, Ohlsson A, Wang EE, Haque K, Weston JA, Hewson SA, Ohel G, Hodnett ED. International Multicentre Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes Study: evaluation of predictors of clinical chorioamnionitis and postpartum fever in patients with prelabor rupture of membranes at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Nov;177(5):1024-9. [PubMed: 9396886]
15.: Ronzoni S, Boucoiran I, Yudin MH, Coolen J, Pylypjuk C, Melamed N, Holden AC, Smith G, Barrett J. Guideline No. 430: Diagnosis and management of preterm prelabour rupture of membranes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2022 Nov;44(11):1193-1208.e1. [PubMed: 36410937]
16.: Higgins RD, Saade G, Polin RA, Grobman WA, Buhimschi IA, Watterberg K, Silver RM, Raju TNK., Chorioamnionitis Workshop Participants. Evaluation and Management of Women and Newborns With a Maternal Diagnosis of Chorioamnionitis: Summary of a Workshop. Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Mar;127(3):426-436. [PMC free article: PMC4764452] [PubMed: 26855098]
17.: Committee Opinion No. 712: Intrapartum Management of Intraamniotic Infection. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Aug;130(2):e95-e101. [PubMed: 28742677]
18.: Yılmaz Semerci S, Yücel B, Erbas IM, Gunkaya OS, Talmac M, Çetinkaya M. The utility of amniotic fluid pH and electrolytes for prediction of neonatal respiratory disorders. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2020 Jan;33(2):253-257. [PubMed: 30033781]
19.: Riedewald S, Kreutzmann IM, Heinze T, Saling E. Vaginal and cervical pH in normal pregnancy and pregnancy complicated by preterm labor. J Perinat Med. 1990;18(3):181-6. [PubMed: 2384841]
20.: Cousins LM, Smok DP, Lovett SM, Poeltler DM. AmniSure placental alpha microglobulin-1 rapid immunoassay versus standard diagnostic methods for detection of rupture of membranes. Am J Perinatol. 2005 Aug;22(6):317-20. [PubMed: 16118720]
21.: Lee SE, Park JS, Norwitz ER, Kim KW, Park HS, Jun JK. Measurement of placental alpha-microglobulin-1 in cervicovaginal discharge to diagnose rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 2007 Mar;109(3):634-40. [PubMed: 17329514]
22.: Thomasino T, Levi C, Draper M, Neubert AG. Diagnosing rupture of membranes using combination monoclonal/polyclonal immunologic protein detection. J Reprod Med. 2013 May-Jun;58(5-6):187-94. [PubMed: 23763001]
23.: Ireland KE, Rodriguez EI, Acosta OM, Ramsey PS. Intra-amniotic Dye Alternatives for the Diagnosis of Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jun;129(6):1040-1045. [PubMed: 28486367]
24.: Prevention of Group B Streptococcal Early-Onset Disease in Newborns: ACOG Committee Opinion, Number 797. Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Feb;135(2):e51-e72. [PubMed: 31977795]
25.: Bellussi F, Seidenari A, Juckett L, Di Mascio D, Berghella V. Induction within or after 12 hours of ≥36 weeks' prelabor rupture of membranes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021 Sep;3(5):100425. [PubMed: 34153513]
26.: Mackeen AD, Quinn ST, Movva VC, Berghella V, Ananth CV. Intracervical balloon catheter for labor induction after rupture of membranes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jun;224(6):624-628. [PubMed: 33689751]
27.: Foley Plus Oxytocin Compared With Oxytocin for Induction After Membrane Rupture: A Randomized Controlled Trial: Correction. Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;131(4):745. [PubMed: 29578977]
28.: Tan BP, Hannah ME. Prostaglandins versus oxytocin for prelabour rupture of membranes at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;1997(2):CD000159. [PMC free article: PMC10868502] [PubMed: 10796161]
29.: Lin MG, Nuthalapaty FS, Carver AR, Case AS, Ramsey PS. Misoprostol for labor induction in women with term premature rupture of membranes: a meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Sep;106(3):593-601. [PubMed: 16135593]
30.: Güngördük K, Asicioglu O, Besimoglu B, Güngördük OC, Yildirm G, Ark C, Sahbaz A. Labor induction in term premature rupture of membranes: comparison between oxytocin and dinoprostone followed 6 hours later by oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jan;206(1):60.e1-8. [PubMed: 21924396]
31.: Committee on Obstetric Practice. Committee Opinion No. 713: Antenatal Corticosteroid Therapy for Fetal Maturation. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Aug;130(2):e102-e109. [PubMed: 28742678]
32.: Roberts D, Dalziel S. Antenatal corticosteroids for accelerating fetal lung maturation for women at risk of preterm birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jul 19;(3):CD004454. [PubMed: 16856047]
33.: Carlo WA, McDonald SA, Fanaroff AA, Vohr BR, Stoll BJ, Ehrenkranz RA, Andrews WW, Wallace D, Das A, Bell EF, Walsh MC, Laptook AR, Shankaran S, Poindexter BB, Hale EC, Newman NS, Davis AS, Schibler K, Kennedy KA, Sánchez PJ, Van Meurs KP, Goldberg RN, Watterberg KL, Faix RG, Frantz ID, Higgins RD., Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Neonatal Research Network. Association of antenatal corticosteroids with mortality and neurodevelopmental outcomes among infants born at 22 to 25 weeks' gestation. JAMA. 2011 Dec 07;306(21):2348-58. [PMC free article: PMC3565238] [PubMed: 22147379]
34.: Chawla S, Natarajan G, Rane S, Thomas R, Cortez J, Lua J. Outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants with varying doses and intervals of antenatal steroid exposure. J Perinat Med. 2010 Jul;38(4):419-23. [PubMed: 20297898]
35.: Morris JM, Roberts CL, Bowen JR, Patterson JA, Bond DM, Algert CS, Thornton JG, Crowther CA., PPROMT Collaboration. Immediate delivery compared with expectant management after preterm pre-labour rupture of the membranes close to term (PPROMT trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016 Jan 30;387(10017):444-52. [PubMed: 26564381]
36.: Quist-Nelson J, de Ruigh AA, Seidler AL, van der Ham DP, Willekes C, Berghella V, Pajkrt E, Patterson J, Espinoza D, Morris J, Mol B, Askie L., Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes Meta-analysis (PPROMM) Collaboration. Immediate Delivery Compared With Expectant Management in Late Preterm Prelabor Rupture of Membranes: An Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Feb;131(2):269-279. [PubMed: 29324621]
37.: Shepherd ES, Goldsmith S, Doyle LW, Middleton P, Marret S, Rouse DJ, Pryde P, Wolf HT, Crowther CA. Magnesium sulphate for women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 May 10;5(5):CD004661. [PMC free article: PMC11082932] [PubMed: 38726883]
38.: Thomson AJ., Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Care of Women Presenting with Suspected Preterm Prelabour Rupture of Membranes from 24⁺⁰ Weeks of Gestation: Green-top Guideline No. 73. BJOG. 2019 Aug;126(9):e152-e166. [PubMed: 31207667]
39.: Yudin MH, van Schalkwyk J, Van Eyk N. [Not Available]. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017 Sep;39(9):e213-e219. [PubMed: 28859769]
40.: Seaman RD, Kopkin RH, Turrentine MA. Erythromycin vs azithromycin for treatment of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Jun;226(6):794-801.e1. [PubMed: 34973176]
41.: Kenyon SL, Taylor DJ, Tarnow-Mordi W., ORACLE Collaborative Group. Broad-spectrum antibiotics for preterm, prelabour rupture of fetal membranes: the ORACLE I randomised trial. ORACLE Collaborative Group. Lancet. 2001 Mar 31;357(9261):979-88. [PubMed: 11293640]
42.: Kenyon S, Boulvain M, Neilson JP. Antibiotics for preterm rupture of membranes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 02;2013(12):CD001058. [PMC free article: PMC11297390] [PubMed: 24297389]
43.: Fox NS, Gelber SE, Kalish RB, Chasen ST. Contemporary practice patterns and beliefs regarding tocolysis among u.s. Maternal-fetal medicine specialists. Obstet Gynecol. 2008 Jul;112(1):42-7. [PubMed: 18591306]
44.: Raju TNK, Mercer BM, Burchfield DJ, Joseph GF. Periviable birth: executive summary of a joint workshop by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2014 May;123(5):1083-1096. [PubMed: 24785861]
45.: Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM). Battarbee AN, Osmundson SS, McCarthy AM, Louis JM., SMFM Publications Committee. Electronic address: pubs@smfm.org. Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #71: Management of previable and periviable preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Oct;231(4):B2-B15. [PubMed: 39025459]
46.: Abrahami Y, Saucedo M, Rigouzzo A, Deneux-Tharaux C, Azria E., ENCMM group. Maternal mortality in women with pre-viable premature rupture of membranes: An analysis from the French confidential enquiry into maternal deaths. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022 Dec;101(12):1395-1402. [PMC free article: PMC9812097] [PubMed: 36207816]
47.: Simons NE, de Ruigh AA, van der Windt LI, Kazemier BM, van Wassenaer-Leemhuis AG, van Teeffelen AS, van Leeuwen E, Mol BW, van 't Hooft J, Pajkrt E. Maternal, perinatal and childhood outcomes of the PPROMEXIL-III cohort: Pregnancies complicated by previable prelabor rupture of membranes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Oct;265:44-53. [PubMed: 34428686]
48.: Hoffman EA, Kaufman J, Koelper NC, Sonalkar S, Roe AH. Outcomes After Induction of Labor Compared With Dilation and Evacuation for the Management of Rupture of Membranes in the Second Trimester. Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Apr 01;143(4):550-553. [PubMed: 38262065]
49.: Kishida T, Negishi H, Sagawa T, Fujimoto S. Spontaneous reseal of the fetal membranes in patients with high-leak PROM, confirmed by intra-amniotic injection of a dye (phenol-sulfonphthalein). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1996 Sep;68(1-2):219-21. [PubMed: 8886711]
50.: Hazan Y, Ben-Arie A, Blickstein I, Hagay Z. Reseal of ruptured membranes after genetic amniocentesis. A case report. J Reprod Med. 2000 Oct;45(10):847-9. [PubMed: 11077637]
51.: Johnson JW, Egerman RS, Moorhead J. Cases with ruptured membranes that "reseal". Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Sep;163(3):1024-30; discussion 1030-2. [PubMed: 2206055]
52.: Waters TP, Mercer BM. The management of preterm premature rupture of the membranes near the limit of fetal viability. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Sep;201(3):230-40. [PubMed: 19733274]
53.: Kibel M, Asztalos E, Barrett J, Dunn MS, Tward C, Pittini A, Melamed N. Outcomes of Pregnancies Complicated by Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes Between 20 and 24 Weeks of Gestation. Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;128(2):313-320. [PubMed: 27400016]
54.: Hoffman MK. Prediction and Prevention of Spontaneous Preterm Birth: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 234. Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Dec 01;138(6):945-946. [PMC free article: PMC8607754] [PubMed: 34794160]

: Disclosure: Shailja Dayal declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
: Disclosure: Suzanne Jenkins declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.
: Disclosure: Peter Hong declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.