Umbilical cord prolapse in case of preterm premature rupture of membranes: When to be more cautious?

Year 2018, , 948 - 956, 15.08.2018

Emre Ekmekçi , Servet Gençdal

https://doi.org/10.30569/adiyamansaglik.437559

Abstract

Purpose: To
describe the umbilical cord prolapse rates in patients with preterm premature
rupture of membranes (PPROM) between 24 weeks and 33 weeks and 6 days gestation
and to define the associated factors with umbilical cord prolapse.

Material and methods: Patients
admitted due to PPROM between 24 weeks and 33 weeks and 6 days of gestation,
and followed in clinic are included in the study. Primary aim of the study was
to describe the umbilical cord prolapse rates. Secondary aim was to describe
the pregnancy specific factors associated with umbilical cord prolapse.

Results:
Total 88 patients are included in the study. Umbilical cord prolapse rate was
3.4% (3/88). Umbilical cord prolapses, all occurred in the first week after
membrane rupture. All were multiparas and at non-vertex presentation.

Conclusion: Umbilical
cord prolapse is much frequent after PPROM compared to general obstetric population.
Clinicians should be more cautious in follow-up of patients after PPROM in case
of earlier gestational weeks, transverse situs and non-vertex presentations,
especially in the first week after PPROM.

Keywords

Malpresentation, Preterm premature rupture of membranes, Umbilical cord prolapse

Preterm erken membran rüptürü durumunda umbilikal kord prolapsusu: Ne zaman daha dikkatli olmalı

Abstract

Amaç: 24-33. Haftalar arasında preterm erken membran rüptürü (PPROM) olan hastalarda umbilikal kord prolaps oranını ve umbilikal kord prolapsusu ile ilişkili faktörleri tanımlamak.
Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya 24-33. Gebelik haftalarında PPROM nedeniyle başvuran ve klinikte takip edilen hastalar dahil edildi. Çalışmanın primer amacı, umbilikal kord prolapsusu oranını tanımlamaktır. Çalışmanın ikincil amaçı, umbilikal kord prolapsusu ile ilişkili gebelikle ilişkili faktörleri tanımlamaktır.
Bulgular: Çalışmaya toplam 88 hasta dahil edildi. Çalışma grubunda umbilikal kord prolapsusu oranı% 3.4 (3/88) idi. Umbilikal kord prolapsuslarının tümü membran rüptüründen sonraki ilk haftada meydana geldi. Hepsi multipar ve non vertex pozisyonunda idi.
Sonuç: Umbilikal kord prolapsusu, PPROM sonrası genel ile karşılaştırıldığında daha sıktır. Klinisyenler, PPROM sonrası hastaların takibinde, özellikle erken gebelik haftalarında, transvers situs ve non-verteks sunumlarında ilk haftada daha dikkatli olmalıdırlar.

Keywords

Malprezentasyon, Preterm erken membran rüptürü, Umbilikal kord prolapsusu

References

• 1. Gibbons C and O'Herlihy C, et al. Umbilical cord prolapse--changing patterns and improved outcomes: a retrospective cohort study. BJOG 2014; 121:1705.
• 2. Behbehani S and Patenaude V, et al. Maternal Risk Factors and Outcomes of Umbilical Cord Prolapse: A Population-Based Study. J ObstetGynaecol Can 2016; 38:23.
• 3. Gannard-Pechin E and Ramanah R, et al. [Umbilical cord prolapse: a case study over 23 years]. J GynecolObstetBiolReprod (Paris) 2012; 41:574.
• 4. Dilbaz B ve Ozturkoglu E, ark. Risk factors and perinatal outcomes associated with umbilical cord prolapse. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2006;274:104–7.
• 5.Ylä-Outinen A and Heinonen PK, et al Predisposing and risk factors of umbilical cord prolapse. ActaObstetGynecolScand 1985; 64:567.
• 6. Uygur D ve Kiş S, ark. Risk factors and infant outcomes associated with umbilical cord prolapse. Int J GynaecolObstet 2002; 78:127.
• 7. Jantien L van der Heyden. Preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: different gestational ages, different problems. Thesis. 2014.
• 8. Practice Bulletin No. 160 Summary: Premature Rupture of Membranes (2016) Obstet Gynecol 127: 192-194.
• 9. Murphy DJ and MacKenzie IZ. The mortality and morbidity associated with umbilical cord prolapse. Br J ObstetGynaecol 1995; 102:826.
• 10.Qureshi NS and Taylor DJ, et al. Umbilical cord prolapse.Int J GynaecolObstet 2004; 86:29.
• 11. Koonings PP and Paul RH, et al. Umbilical cord prolapse: a contemporary look. J Reprod Med 1990;35(7):690–2.