IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0312760.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Influence of clinical risk factors for preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) on the elastic strength of fetal membranes at term: A prospective study

Author

Listed:
  • Amaury Robin
  • Nicolas Tessier Doyen
  • Sami Ben Rhaiem
  • Nancy Valette
  • Véronique Fermeaux
  • Pierre-Marie Preux
  • Sophie Martinez
  • Jean-Luc Eyraud
  • Chahrazed El Hamel
  • Didier Riethmuller
  • Perrine Coste Mazeau

Abstract

Introduction: Premature rupture of membranes (PROM) before 37 weeks of gestation is a common obstetrical event, whose pathophysiology is still poorly understood. Our objective was to study the mechanical strength of fetal membranes in women with a clinical risk factor for preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). Methods: We included, in a prospective, descriptive, single-center study, patients scheduled for cesarean section at term (≥ 37 weeks of gestation). For each patient, we performed uniaxial tensile tests on fetal membranes with a universal testing machine equipped with a force sensor (EZ20®, Lloyds), allowing the recording of an applied force/time curve. We collected maximum force (Fmax), maximum stress (σMax), and Young’s modulus of elasticity. The thickness of each membrane sample was also measured. We compared the values obtained according to certain clinical risk factors for PPROM such as age, body mass index, gravidity, parity, a history of PPROM or preterm birth, smoking, gestational diabetes, geographic origin, and socioeconomic level. Results: We analyzed 31 patients and found no association between the studied risk factors and σMax. Fmax was lower in primiparous patients (p = 0.02) but increased with patient parity (p = 0.005). Gestational diabetes was associated with a higher Fmax (p = 0.033) and sub-Saharan geographical origin with a greater thickness (p = 0.0043). As membrane thickness increased, σMax (p = 0.009) and Young’s modulus decreased (p = 0.037). Conclusion: Primiparous patients have lower membrane mechanical strength than patients who have had one or more deliveries. Mechanically, the thicker membranes are less rigid and less resistant.

Suggested Citation

  • Amaury Robin & Nicolas Tessier Doyen & Sami Ben Rhaiem & Nancy Valette & Véronique Fermeaux & Pierre-Marie Preux & Sophie Martinez & Jean-Luc Eyraud & Chahrazed El Hamel & Didier Riethmuller & Perrine, 2024. "Influence of clinical risk factors for preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) on the elastic strength of fetal membranes at term: A prospective study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-17, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0312760
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0312760
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0312760
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0312760&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0312760?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefaan W Verbruggen & Michelle L Oyen & Andrew T M Phillips & Niamh C Nowlan, 2017. "Function and failure of the fetal membrane: Modelling the mechanics of the chorion and amnion," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-14, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0312760. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.