ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Preterm Prelabour Rupture of Membranes before Viability in Twin Pregnancies: What Can We Expect?
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Previable PROM in twins: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
- Severe maternal morbidity after expectant management of pre- and periviable prelabor rupture of membranes in singleton vs multiple gestations.American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM · 2026Article
- PROMISE-impact of maternal and neonatal risk factors on the respiratory outcome of extremely preterm infants following PPROM in the second trimester of pregnancy.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Article
- Maternal Outcomes Following Active vs. Expectant Management of Previable Preterm Pre-Labor Rupture of Membranes: A Meta-Analysis.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preterm prelabour rupture of membranes (PPROMs) before viability carries significant perinatal mortality and morbidity. Clinical management and prenatal counselling are a challenge, especially in twin pregnancies, due to scarce evidence on how previable PPROM affects this population. The aim of this study was to describe pregnancy outcomes of twin pregnancies complicated with previable PPROM and evaluate potential prognostic factors that may predict perinatal mortality. A retrospective cohort including dichorionic and monochorionic diamniotic twin pregnancies complicated with PPROM before 24 + 0 weeks of pregnancy was evaluated. Perinatal outcomes of pregnancies managed expectantly were described. Factors predicting perinatal mortality or reaching periviability (defined from 23 + 0 weeks onwards) were evaluated. Of the 45 patients included, 7 (15.6%) spontaneously delivered within the first 24 h after diagnosis. Two patients (5.3%) requested selective termination of the affected twin. In the 36 ongoing pregnancies that opted for expectant management, the overall survival rate was 35/72 (48.6%). There were 25/36 (69.4%) patients who delivered after 23 + 0 weeks of pregnancy. When periviability was achieved, neonatal survival increased up to 35/44 (79.5%). Gestational age at delivery was the only independent risk factor of perinatal mortality. The overall survival rate of twin pregnancies complicated with previable PPROM is poor but similar to singletons. No prognostic factors, apart from achieving periviability, were identified as individual predictors of perinatal mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.