4.6 Article

Bedside assessment of amniotic fluid interleukin-6 in preterm prelabor rupture of membranes

Journal

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.03.069

Keywords

amniotic fluid; cytokine; histological chorioamnionitis; interleukin-6; microbial invasion of the amniotic fluid

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic [NS 13461-4/2012]
  2. Charles University in Prague
  3. Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic [PRVOUK P37/10]
  4. Faculty Hospital in Hradec Kralove
  5. Swedish government grants (ALF) [ALFGBG-136431]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine the diagnostic indices and predictive values by bedside assessment of amniotic fluid interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentration in the identification of microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC) and/or histological chorioamnionitis (HCA) in patients with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. STUDY DESIGN: One hundred twenty-four women with singleton pregnancies were included in this study. The amniotic fluid was sampled by transabdominal amniocentesis at the time of admission. IL-6 concentrations were assessed with an immunoassay. RESULTS: The presence of MIAC, HCA, or the coexistence of both was associated with higher amniotic fluid concentrations of IL-6 in both a crude and adjusted analysis. The amniotic fluid concentration of IL-6 of 1000 pg/mL was determined to be the best cutoff value for the prediction of MIAC (sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 95%, positive predictive value of 82%, negative predictive value of 81%, and likelihood ratio of 8.4) or both MIAC and HCA (sensitivity of 60%, specificity of 94%, positive predictive value of 75%, negative predictive value of 88%, and likelihood ratio of 9.4). CONCLUSION: The bedside assessment of amniotic fluid IL-6 seems to be an easy, rapid, and inexpensive method for the prediction of MIAC or both MIAC and HCA in pregnancies complicated by preterm prelabor rupture of membranes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available