Effect of premature rupture of membranes on time to delivery and outcomes in full-term pregnancies with vaginal dinoprostone-induced labour

  • Xiaoyan Wang
  • Xiaoyan Zhang
  • Yiran Liu
  • Tingting Jiang
  • Yang Dai
  • Yangyang Gong
  • Qin Li
  • Xueyan WangEmail author
Maternal-Fetal Medicine



The aim of this study was to assess the effect of premature rupture of membranes (PROM) in full-term pregnancies with dinoprostone-induced labour.

Patients and methods

This historical cohort study analysed 2166 full-term pregnancies with dinoprostone-induced labour between 1 August 2016 and 30 April 2018. A group that underwent induction of labour for PROM (PROM group) was compared to a group that underwent labour induction for other indications (no-PROM group). Time to delivery and perinatal outcome were compared between the two groups.


A total of 2166 pregnancies (662 PROM and 1504 no-PROM) were included. The two groups demonstrated no significant differences except in biparietal diameter and gestational age (P < 0.001). The caesarean section delivery rate in the PROM group was significantly lower than in the non-PROM group (26.89 vs. 33.58%, P < 0.0001). In the PROM group, the induction-to-delivery time was shorter (P < 0.0001) and the rates of vaginal birth within 24 h (P < 0.0001) and 48 h (P < 0.0001) were higher than those in the control group. The incidence rate of amniotic fluid contamination in the PROM group was significantly lower than that in the non-PROM group (19.18 vs. 25.20%, P = 0.002).


PROM significantly affects perinatal outcome in Chinese women who undergo dinoprostone-induced labour, especially the caesarean delivery rate and the induction-to-delivery time.


Premature rupture of membranes Dinoprostone Labour induction Caesarean section Time to delivery 


Author contributions

XW designed the study. YL, TJ, YD, YG, QL preformed the experiments. XW, XZ analysed the date. XW wrote the manuscript.



Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Informed consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.


  1. 1.
    Practice bulletins No. 139 (2013) Premature rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol 122(4):918–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kunt C, Kanat-Pektas M, Gungor AN, Kurt RK, Ozat M, Gulerman C, Gungor T, Mollamahmutoglu L (2010) Randomized trial of vaginal prostaglandin E2 versus oxytocin for labor induction in term premature rupture of membranes. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 49:57–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marowitz A, Hunter H (2004) Management of ruptured membranes at term. J Midwife Women’s Health 49:539–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rijal H, Manandhar R, Pradhan N (2012) A randomized study comparing intravaginal Prostaglandin (PGE2) with oxytocin for induction of labour in premature rupture of membrane at term. Nepal Med Coll J 14(3):199–203PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Middleton P, Shepherd E, Flenady V, McBain RD, Crowther CA (2017) Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 1:CD005302PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lapuente-Ocamica O, Ugarte L, Lopez-Picado A, Sanchez-Refoyo F, Lasa IL, Echevarria O, Álvarez-Sala J, Fariñas A, Bilbao I, Barbero L, Vicarregui J, Hernanz Chaves R, Paz Corral D, Lopez-Lopez JA (2019) Efficacy and safety of administering oral misoprostol by titration compared to vaginal misoprostol and dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: study protocol for a randomised clinical trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 19(1):14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim YM, Park JY, Sung JH, Choi SJ, Oh SY, Roh CR, Kim JH (2017) Predicting factors for success of vaginal delivery in preterm induction with prostaglandin E2. Obstet Gynecol Sci 60:163–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thomas J, Fairclough A, Kavanagh J, Kelly AJ (2014) Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD003101Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pevzner L, Rayburn WF, Rumney P, Wing DA (2009) Factors predicting successful labor induction with dinoprostone and misoprostol vaginal inserts. Obstet Gynecol 114(2 Pt 1):261–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kawakita T, Grantz KL, Landy HJ, Huang CC, Kominiarek MA (2017) Induction of labor in women with oligohydramnios: misoprostol compared with prostaglandin E2. Am J Perinatol 34(2):204–210PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baev OR, Rumyantseva VP, Tysyachnyu OV, Kozlova OA, Sukhikh GT (2017) Outcomes of mifepristone usage for cervical ripening and induction of labour in full-term pregnancy. Randomized controlled trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 217:144–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu YR, Pu CX, Wang XY, Wang XY (2019) Double-balloon catheter versus dinoprostone insert for labour induction: a meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 299(1):7–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    DeCherney AH, Nathan L (2013) Current diagnosis & treatment: obstetrics & gynecology. Chapter 14: Late pregnancy complication, section: premature rupture of membranes. McGraw-Hill Medical, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wojcieszek AM, Stock OM, Flenady V (2014) Antibiotics for prelabour rupture of membranes at or near term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 10:001807Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kehl S, Weiss C, Dammer U, Baier F, Faschingbauer F, Beckmann MW, Sütterlin M, Pretscher J (2017) Effect of premature rupture of membranes on induction of labor: a historical cohort study. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 77(11):1174–1181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wood S, Cooper S, Ross S (2014) Does induction of labour increase the risk of caesarean section? A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials in women with intact membranes. BJOG 121:674–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Park KH, Hong JS, Ko JK, Cho YK, Lee CM, Choi H, Kim BR (2006) Comparative study of induction of labor in nulliparous women with premature rupture of membranes at term compared to those with intact membranes: duration of labor and mode of delivery. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 32:482–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chongqing Health Center for Women and ChildrenChongqingChina

Personalised recommendations