Skip to main content
PMC home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Nov 27.
Published in final edited form as: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015 Mar 23;29(3):360–367. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1006621

A point of care test for interleukin-6 in amniotic fluid in preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: a step toward the early treatment of acute intra-amniotic inflammation/infection

Piya Chaemsaithong 1,2, Roberto Romero 1,3,4, Steven J Korzeniewski 1,2,4, Alicia Martinez-Varea 1,2, Zhong Dong 1,2, Bo Hyun Yoon 1,5, Sonia S Hassan 1,2, Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa 1,2, Lami Yeo 1,2
PMCID: PMC5703063  NIHMSID: NIHMS903376  PMID: 25758620

Abstract

Objective

Preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (preterm PROM) accounts for 30–40% of spontaneous preterm deliveries and thus is a major contributor to perinatal morbidity and mortality. An amniotic fluid (AF) interleukin-6 (IL-6) concentration is a key cytokine for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation, patients at risk of impending preterm delivery, and adverse pregnancy complications. The conventional method to determine IL-6 concentrations in AF is an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). However, this technique is not available in clinical settings, and the results may take several days. A lateral flow-based immunoassay, or point of care (POC) test, has been developed to address this issue. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of AF IL-6 determined by the POC test to that determined by ELISA for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective cohort study includes 56 women with singleton pregnancies who presented with preterm PROM. Amniocentesis was performed at the time of diagnosis, and AF was analyzed using cultivation techniques for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria as well as genital mycoplasmas. AF Gram stain and AF white blood cell counts were determined. AF IL-6 concentrations were measured using both lateral flow-based immunoassay and ELISA. The primary outcome was intra-amniotic inflammation defined as AF ELISA IL-6 ≥ 2,600 pg/ml. A previously determined cut-off of 745 pg/ml was used to define a positive POC test.

Results

1) The POC test for AF IL-6 concentrations had 97% sensitivity and 96% specificity for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation, as defined using ELISA among patients with preterm PROM; and 2) the diagnostic performance of the POC test for IL-6 was strongly correlated to that of an ELISA test for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation and was equivalent for the identification of acute inflammatory placental lesions and microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC).

Conclusion

A point of care AF IL-6 test can identify intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM. Results can be available within 20 minutes – this makes it possible to implement interventions designed to treat intra-amniotic inflammation and improve pregnancy outcomes.

Keywords: acute chorioamnionitis, acute funisitis, amniocentesis, biomarkers, ELISA, microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC), preterm labor, rapid interleukin-6

Introduction

Prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) is a common complication of pregnancy [1–6], occurring in 10% of term patients [7–10]. Preterm PROM accounts for 30–40% of spontaneous preterm deliveries [11] and is a major cause of perinatal morbidity and mortality [3,12–19].

Microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC) is detected in approximately 30% of patients with preterm PROM using cultivation techniques [20–34], and in 50% when using a combination of cultivation and molecular methods [35,36]. Moreover, the frequency of MIAC increases from 30% at the time of PROM to 75% at the onset of labor [37]. The result of amniotic fluid (AF) culture may take days. In contrast, the assessment of intra-amniotic inflammation could be done rapidly through analysis of AF. Previous studies have shown that the outcomes of patients with preterm PROM and intra-amniotic inflammation without detectable microorganisms (sterile intra-amniotic inflammation) is similar to that of patients with microorganisms in the amniotic cavity detected using cultivation or molecular techniques [35,36,38]. Indeed, patients with sterile intra-amniotic inflammation are at risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes whether they present with preterm labor and intact membranes [39,40] or a short cervix [41]. Thus far, AF interleukin-6 (IL-6) performs best among a wide variety of tests in detecting intra-amniotic infection/inflammation, as well as in the identification of patients at risk of impending preterm delivery and neonatal complications [26,42–49].

The standard method to determine IL-6 is enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). However, the results take time and are often not available in time for clinical decisions. Even though an ELISA can be performed in 8 hours, laboratories often batch specimens, and these assays are run only a few times per week, limiting the availability of results for acute patient management decisions (such as those required in obstetrics). A lateral flow-based immunoassay point of care (POC) test for IL-6 was developed to address this issue. This rapid test has been used to detect sepsis in neonates [50,51] and adults [52], as well as inflammation of the cerebrospinal fluid [53]. Recently, we reported that the results of such as test correlate strongly with IL-6 determinations assessed by ELISA (Spearman’s ρ = 0.92) [54]. Moreover, the diagnostic performance for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm labor with intact membranes was comparable to that of AF ELISA IL-6 [55]. Other groups have used a POC test to determine IL-6 concentrations in vaginal fluid to assess the risk of impending preterm delivery, one included asymptomatic patients at risk of preterm delivery [56] and another included patients with preterm PROM [57]. Kacerovsky et al used a POC test to determine IL-6 in AF from patients with preterm PROM to identify MIAC and acute histological chorioamnionitis [58]. The objective of this study was to compare the diagnostic and prognostic performance of an AF IL-6 POC test to IL-6 determined by ELISA in identifying intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM.

Material and Methods

Study population

This retrospective cohort study included women with singleton pregnancies and preterm PROM. Patients were identified by searching the clinical database and Bank of Biological Samples of Wayne State University, the Detroit Medical Center, and the Perinatology Research Branch of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (Detroit, MI). The inclusion criteria were: 1) singleton gestation; 2) trans-abdominal amniocentesis between 20 and 35 weeks; 3) available AF for the performance of microbiologic studies; and 4) neonatal outcomes were known. Patients were excluded from the study if they had: 1) a chromosomal or structural fetal anomaly; or 2) placenta previa.

Patients with the diagnosis of preterm PROM were counseled by their treating physicians about the potential value of identifying microorganisms in AF. Women who agreed to undergo an amniocentesis were asked to donate additional AF other than that required for clinical studies and allow collection of clinical information for research purposes. Further management of these patients was at the discretion of the attending physician. All patients provided written informed consent and the use of biological specimens and clinical data for research purposes were approved by the Institutional Review Boards of NICHD and Wayne State University.

Biological samples and analysis

AF was transported in a capped sterile syringe to the clinical laboratory where it was cultured for aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, including genital mycoplasmas. AF not required for clinical assessment was centrifuged for 10 min at 4°C shortly after and stored at −70°C until analysis. Evaluation of white blood cell (WBC) count, glucose concentration, and Gram stain of AF were also performed after collection. The presence of intra-amniotic infection/inflammation was assessed by determination of AF IL-6 concentration by ELISA. AF IL-6 concentrations were measured for research purposes only, and the results were not used in patient’s management.

Clinical Definitions

Gestational age was determined by the last menstrual period and confirmed by ultrasound examination, or by ultrasound examination alone if the sonographic determination of gestational age was not consistent with menstrual dating. Preterm PROM was diagnosed using a sterile speculum examination with documentation of pooling of AF in the vagina in association with a positive nitrazine test and/or positive ferning tests when necessary. Clinical chorioamnionitis was diagnosed when maternal temperature was ≥37.8 °C and two or more of the following criteria were present: uterine tenderness, malodorous vaginal discharge, maternal leukocytosis (>15,000 cells/mm3), maternal tachycardia (>100 beats/min), or fetal tachycardia (>160 beats/min) [59–61]. The diagnosis of acute histologic chorioamnionitis was made on the basis of the presence of acute inflammatory changes in the examination of the extra-placental chorioamniotic membrane roll and/or chorionic plate of the placenta using criteria previously described [62,63]. Funisitis was diagnosed when neutrophil infiltration was detected in the umbilical vessel walls or Wharton’s jelly using criteria previously reported [64,65]. Intra-amniotic inflammation was diagnosed when AF IL-6 determined ELISA concentration was ≥2,600 pg/ml [36,39,46]. MIAC was defined according to the results of AF culture. Intra-amniotic infection was defined as a combination of MIAC with intra-amniotic inflammation.

Analysis of amniotic fluid samples for IL-6 concentrations

AF IL-6 concentrations (pg/ml) were determined both by ELISA and by the lateral flow-based immunoassay POC test. For ELISA, AF IL-6 concentrations were determined by immunoassays obtained from R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN, USA). The POC determination of AF IL-6 concentrations (pg/ml) was performed using a lateral flow-based immunoassay POC test (Milenia QuickLine® IL-6; Milenia Biotec, Bad Nauheim, Germany). The details and performance of ELISA [46,66–71] and POC immunoassays have been previously described [54]. We used a cut-off value of 745 pg/ml for the AF IL-6 POC test, similar to the cut-off value for intra-amniotic inflammation in preterm labor with intact membranes identified previously [55]. The IL-6 POC test inter- and intra-assay coefficients of variations are 15.5%, and 12.1%, respectively.

Study outcomes

The primary outcome was the presence of intra-amniotic inflammation (defined as an AF IL-6 ELISA concentration of ≥2,600 pg/ml). Secondary outcomes included the presence of a positive AF culture, and the presence of acute inflammatory lesions of the placenta (acute histologic chorioamnionitis and/or acute funisitis). The relationships between acute histologic chorioamnionitis and AF IL-6 concentrations were examined in 26 patients who delivered within 3 days after amniocentesis. This interval was chosen to preserve a meaningful temporal relationship between the results of amniocentesis and placental pathology.

Statistical Analysis

The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to assess normality of arithmetic data distributions. The Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to make comparisons among and between groups for arithmetic variables. The Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test was used for comparisons of categorical variables, as appropriate. Survival analysis was used to compare the amniocentesis-to-delivery interval between groups. The interval from amniocentesis-to-delivery of women who did not undergo spontaneous labor (delivered for maternal or fetal indications) was treated as a censored observation, with a censoring time equal to the amniocentesis-to-delivery interval. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 19 (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA) and SAS 9.4 (Cary, NC, USA). A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Characteristics of the study population

Fifty-six women diagnosed with preterm PROM were included in this study. Their clinical characteristics are displayed in Table 1. The median gestational age at amniocentesis was 28.8 [interquartile range (IQR) 25.7–31.5] weeks. The prevalence of MIAC and intra-amniotic inflammation was 25% (14/56) and 60.7% (34/56), respectively. The frequency of preterm delivery at <28 and at <34 weeks of gestation was 33.9% (19/56), and 96.4% (54/56), respectively. The prevalence of acute histological chorioamnionitis and acute funisitis was 57.9% (15/26) and 46.2% (12/26), respectively.

Table 1.

Clinical characteristics of the study population

Characteristics Preterm prelabor rupture of membrane (n=56)
Maternal age (years) 26.5 (21.7–31.5)
Nulliparity 33.9% (19/56)
Prior preterm delivery 17.9% (10/56)
Gestational age at amniocentesis (weeks) 28.8 (25.7–31.5)
Amniotic fluid glucose (mg/dl) 17 (10–27)
Amniotic fluid white blood cell (cell/m3) 20 (1–145.5)
Microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (%) 25% (14/56)
Intra-amniotic inflammation (ELISA IL-6 ≥ 2,600 pg/ml) (%) 60.7% (34/56)
Gestational age at delivery (weeks) 30.8 (27.1–32.9)
Interval from amniocentesis to delivery (days) 3 (1–12.75)
Delivery at < 28 weeks of gestation (%) 33.9% (19/56)
Delivery at < 34 weeks of gestation (%) 96.4% (54/56)
Acute histological chorioamnionitis (%)* 57.9% (15/26)
Acute funisitis (%)* 46.2% (12/26)
Acute inflammatory lesions of placenta (%)* 57.9% (15/26)
Open in a new tab

Data presented as median (interquartile range) or % (n)

*

Included only patients who had interval from amniocentesis to delivery ≤ 3 days.

Table 2 describes clinical characteristics among the 14 patients diagnosed with MIAC, including AF IL-6 concentrations determined by both the POC and ELISA assays, and the presence or absence of acute inflammatory lesions of the placenta. The most frequent organism identified in AF was Ureaplasma urealyticum, occurring in 50% (7/14). Twenty-one percent (3/14) had a polymicrobial infection.

Table 2.

Clinical characteristics, amniotic fluid inflammatory response, and acute inflammatory placental lesions in patients with microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity using cultivation techniques.

No. Organisms GA at delivery (weeks) ELISA IL-6 (pg/ml) Point of care IL-6 (pg/ml) AF WBC (cell/mm3) AF glucose (mg/dl) Acute histological chorioamnionitis Acute funisitis
1. Haemophilus influenza beta lactamase 32+1 1765.62 428 0 15 Acute chorioamnionitis Umbilical arteritis
2. Ureaplasma urealyticum 29+4 963.7 262 20 32 No No
3. Ureaplasma urealyticum 31+4 2169.02 537 0 35 No No
4. Ureaplasma urealyticum, Mycoplasma hominis, Streptococcus viridian 25+6 949.97 350 4773 1 Necrotizing chorioamnionitis Umbilical arteritis
5. Bacteroides ureolyticus, Gram-negative bacilli 29+5 5416.71 2054 10 27 Acute chorioamnionitis Umbilical arteritis
6. Streptococcus pneumoniae 22+6 120 378.2 4245 723 10 Acute chorioamnionitis Umbilical phlebitis/chorionic vasculitis
7. Streptococcus mitis 22+2 167 371.76 5310 144 1 Acute subchorionitis Umbilical arteritis
8. Streptococcus species 24+2 157 500.9 8432 760 10 Acute chorioamnionitis No
9. Bacteroides ureolyticus 20+1 326 190.4 3305 19 N/A Acute chorioamnionitis Umbilical phlebitis/chorionic vasculitis
10. Ureaplasma urealyticum 27+1 9910.19 3488 20 22 Acute chorioamnionitis Umbilical arteritis
11. Ureaplasma urealyticum 30+4 27 213.11 3570 1080 10 Acute chorioamnionitis Umbilical arteritis
12. Ureaplasma urealyticum 31+1 7413.27 1108 26 19 No No
13. Streptococcus group B, Prevotella species 30+1 39 379.07 3403 28 15 Necrotizing chorioamnionitis Umbilical arteritis
14. Ureaplasma urealyticum 27+4 284 940 4748 660 19 Subchorionic microabscesses Umbilical arteritis
Open in a new tab

N/A: not available; WBC: white blood cell count; AF: amniotic fluid.

Acute subchorionitis/chorionitis = acute histologic chorioamnionitis stage 1;

Acute chorioamnionitis = acute histologic chorioamnionitis stage 2;

Necrotizing chorioamnionitis and subacute chorioamnionitis = acute histologic chorioamnionitis stage 3;

Subchorionic microabscessess = severe acute histologic chorioamnionitis;

Umbilical phlebitis/chorionic vasculitis = acute funisitis stage 1;

Umbilical arteritis = acute funisitis stage 2;

Necrotizing funisitis = acute funisitis stage 3.

Amniotic fluid interleukin-6 point of care in the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation

Table 3 describes the diagnostic performance of the POC AF IL-6 test for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation (AF IL-6 ELISA ≥2,600 pg/ml). It also shows that the POC and ELISA tests were equivalent in identifying patients with MIAC, as well as those with acute inflammatory lesions of the placenta, since sensitivity and specificity differed by <5% and 95% confidence intervals for each estimate overlapped.

Table 3.

Diagnostic performance of point of care AF IL-6 concentrations and ELISA AF IL-6 for identification of intra-amniotic inflammation, intra-amniotic infection, and placental lesions consistent with acute inflammation

Outcomes Diagnostic performance Point of care IL-6 test (cut-off 745 pg/ml) ELISA IL-6 (cut-off 2600 pg/ml)
% (n) 95% CI % (n) 95% CI
Intra-amniotic inflammation [60.7% (34/56)] Sensitivity 97.1 (33/34) (84.6–99.5) 100% diagnostic performance. ELISA IL-6 is a gold standard test for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation.
Specificity 95.5 (21/22) (77.1–99.2)
Positive predictive value 97.1 (33/34) (86.6–99.5)
Negative predictive value 95.5 (21/22) (77.1–99.2)
Positive likelihood ratio 21.4 (97.1/4.5) (3.14–145.0)
Negative likelihood ratio 0.03 (2.9/95.5) (0–0.2)
Microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC) identified by culture [25% (14/56)] Sensitivity 71.4 (10/14) (41.9–91.4) 71.4 (10/14) (41.9–91.4)
Specificity 42.9 (18/42) (27.7–59.04) 42.9 (18/42) (27.7–59.04)
Positive predictive value 29.4 (10/34) (15.12–47.5) 29.4 (10/34) (15.12–47.5)
Negative predictive value 81.8 (18/22) (59.7–94.7) 81.8 (18/22) (59.7–94.7)
Positive likelihood ratio 1.3 (71.4/57.1) (0.8–1.9) 1.3 (71.4/57.1) (0.8–1.9)
Negative likelihood ratio 0.67 (28.6/42.9) (0.27–1.64) 0.67 (28.6/42.9) (0.27–1.64)
Acute inflammatory lesions of placenta (acute chorioamnionitis or acute funisitis) [only patients who delivered within 3 days after amniocentesis were included [57.69% (15/26)]] Sensitivity 73.3 (11/15) (44.9–92.1) 73.3 (11/15) (44.9–92.1)
Specificity 63.6 (7/11) (30.9–88.9) 54.6 (6/11) (23.5–83.1)
Positive predictive value 73.3 (11/15) (44.9–92.1) 68.8 (11/16) (41.4–88.9)
Negative predictive value 63.6 (7/11) (30.9–88.9) 60.0 (6/11) (26.4–87.6)
Positive likelihood ratio 2.0 (73.3/36.4) (0.9–4.7) 1.6 (73.3/45.4) (0.8–3.3)
Negative likelihood ratio 0.4 (26.7/63.6) (0.2–1.1) 0.5 (26.7/54.6) (0.2–1.3)
Acute funisitis [only patients who delivered within 3 days after amniocentesis were included [46.2% (12/26)]] Sensitivity 75 (9/12) (42.8–94.2) 75.0 (9/12) (42.8–94.2)
Specificity 57.1 (8/14) (28.9–82.2) 50.0 (7/14) (23.1–76.9)
Positive predictive value 60 (9/15) (32.3–83.6) 56.3 (9/16) (29.9–80.2)
Negative predictive value 72.7 (8/11) (39.1–93.7) 70.0 (7/10) (34.8–93.0)
Positive likelihood ratio 1.8 (75.0/42.9) (0.9–3.5) 1.5 (75/50) (0.8–2.8)
Negative likelihood ratio 0.4 (25.0/57.1) (0.2–1.3) 0.5 (25/50) (0.2–1.5)
Open in a new tab

MIAC: microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity; CI: confidence interval.

A single patient whose AF IL-6 ELISA concentration (2,402 pg/ml) approached (but did not reach) the threshold for being considered as intra-amniotic inflammation (AF IL-6 ELISA ≥ 2,600 pg/ml) had a positive POC IL-6 test, constituting a false-positive test result. The amniocentesis-to-delivery interval was 68 days, and the patient delivered spontaneously at 36.3 weeks of gestation without MIAC or acute placental inflammatory lesions of placenta. The POC test also failed to identify one case of intra-amniotic inflammation (i.e., a false negative). This patient was induced due to preterm PROM and delivered at 32 weeks of gestation, but did not have MIAC or acute inflammatory lesions of placenta. Hence, it is difficult to determine whether this patient had a false-positive ELISA IL-6 test result.

Pregnancy outcomes of patients with positive POC AF IL-6

AF glucose was significantly lower but AF WBC count was significantly higher in patients with positive POC tests than in those with negative results (p=0.01 for both) (Table 4). The frequency of MIAC was not different among these groups (p=0.34). Patients with a positive POC test had a significantly lower gestational age at amniocentesis, gestational age at delivery, and neonatal birthweight than those with negative POC tests (p=0.005, 0.008, and 0.03, respectively) (Table 4). The frequency of delivery at less than 28 weeks of gestation and acute histological chorioamnionitis tended to be higher in patients with positive POC tests than in those who had negative tests (p=0.06 for both).

Table 4.

Pregnancy outcomes according to the results of point of care IL-6 (using cut-off: 745 pg/ml)

Negative point of care IL-6 (Group 1) (n=22) Positive point of care IL-6 (Group 2) (n=34) P value
Amniotic fluid glucose (mg/dl) 25.5 (11.5–32.75) 14 (10–22) 0.01
Amniotic fluid WBC (cell/m3) 4.5 (0–38) 27 (6.8–262.5) 0.01
Gestational age at amniocentesis (weeks) 30.65 (28–31.78) 27 (22.7–30.48) 0.005
Microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC) 18.2% (4/14) 29.4% (10/34) 0.34
Gestational age at delivery (weeks) 31.8 (30.6–33.18) 28.9 (23.48–32.78) 0.008
Delivery < 28 week (n=19) 50% (2/4) 89.5% (17/19) 0.06
Delivery < 34 week (n=54) 95.5% (21/22) 97.1% (33/34) 0.75
Birthweight (grams) 1752.5 (1398.8–2108.8) 1220 (524–1777.5) 0.03
ELISA amniotic fluid IL-6 (pg/ml) 1091.7 (701.1–1965.6) 12 328.1 (6138.7–132 198.2) <0.001
Acute histologic chorioamnionitis (n=15) 36.4% (4/11) 73.3% (11/15) 0.06
Acute funisitis (n=12) 27.3% (3/11) 60% (9/15) 0.098
Open in a new tab

AF: amniotic fluid; GA: gestational age; WBC: white blood cell; ELISA: enzyme linked immunosorbent assay; IL: interleukin.

Discussion

Principal findings of the study

1) A positive POC test for AF concentrations of IL-6 in women with preterm PROM had 97% sensitivity and 96% specificity for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation as defined by ELISA; and 2) results of the POC test were equivalent to those determined by ELISA in identifying patients with MIAC as well as those with acute inflammatory lesions of the placenta. These findings suggest that a POC test for AF concentrations of IL-6 can be used in place of ELISA for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation in women with preterm PROM.

AF IL-6 determined by a point of care test in preterm PROM

It is well-established that intra-amniotic infection or intra-amniotic inflammation is associated with adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes [40,41,46,72,73], and that patients with intra-amniotic inflammation without detectable microorganisms have a similar outcome to those with intra-amniotic inflammation associated with the presence of microorganisms [38,39,41,46,72–74]. Therefore, a key issue in determining outcome is the presence or absence of inflammation.

Acute histologic chorioamnionitis (a maternal host response) [62,63,75] and funisitis (a fetal host response) [64,76] are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. [16,68,75–108]. The AF concentration of IL-6 correlates better with the presence and magnitude of acute histologic inflammatory lesions of the placenta than the presence or absence of microorganisms in the amniotic cavity [35,36,38,68,70,72]. This is not surprising, because IL-6 is an inflammatory mediator. Microorganisms detected in the amniotic cavity may vary in virulence, capacity to elicit an inflammatory response, and sometimes, a positive culture may be the result of contamination instead of true infection [109–113].

In previous studies, our group reported that AF IL-6 concentrations measured using a POC test were strongly correlated with those determined by conventional ELISA [54]. Moreover, the diagnostic performance of the POC AF IL-6 test was comparable to that of IL-6 determined by ELISA (sensitivity and specificity >90%) and impending spontaneous preterm delivery in patients with preterm labor with intact membranes [55].

In this study, we demonstrated that the AF IL-6 POC test is sensitive and specific for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM. Only one patient (2.9%, 1/36) had a false-negative AF POC IL-6 determination (IL-6 POC < 745 pg/ml but had ELISA IL-6 ≥ 2,600 pg/ml). Moreover, the AF IL-6 concentrations determined by the POC test had equivalent diagnostic performance to that measured by ELISA for the identification MIAC and placental lesions consistent with acute inflammation.

Other point of care tests in preterm PROM

It was previously reported that a rapid metalloproteinase-8 test has clinical value in the determination of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM [114]. This test has a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 92% in the identification of intra-amniotic infection/inflammation and was an independent predictor of interval to delivery and significant neonatal morbidity [114]. We report herein that an AF IL-6 POC test can be used as an alternative to assess the likelihood of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM. Both tests have optimal properties of a POC test, namely: 1) sensitive and specific for the determination of intra-amniotic inflammation; 2) simple to perform; 3) inexpensive to set up; 4) operator independent; 5) rapid in obtaining the result (within 20 minutes); and 6) low maintenance (for the kit).

Strengths and limitations

The strengths of this study include: 1) the POC test was not used to inform treatment; 2) we included a homogenous group of patients with preterm PROM rather than additionally including patients with preterm labor with intact membrane who have a lower prevalence of intra-amniotic infection/inflammation; and 3) AF IL-6 concentrations were determined using both a POC test and ELISA. However, the study had a small sample size and, since we used cultivation to identify microorganisms in the amniotic cavity, non-culturable bacteria may not have been detected.

Conclusion

Amniotic fluid IL-6 concentrations determined using a POC test can identify intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm PROM with strong diagnostic performance. Further studies are warranted to determine whether treatment with antibiotics and/or anti-inflammatory agents informed by the POC test might improve pregnancy outcomes in this setting.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported, in part, by the Perinatology Research Branch, Division of Intramural Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services (NICHD/NIH); and, in part, with Federal funds from NICHD, NIH under Contract No. HHSN275201300006C.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  • 1.Romero R, Yeo L, Gotsch F, et al. Prelabor rupture of the membranes. In: Winn HN, Chervanak FA, Romero R, editors. Clinical Maternal-Fetal Medicine Online. 2. UK: Informa Healthcare; 2011. pp. 1–24. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Parry S, Strauss JF., 3rd Premature rupture of the fetal membranes. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:663–670. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199803053381006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Mercer BM. Preterm premature rupture of the membranes: current approaches to evaluation and management. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2005;32:411–428. doi: 10.1016/j.ogc.2005.03.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kenyon S, Boulvain M, Neilson JP. Antibiotics for preterm rupture of membranes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;12:CD001058. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001058.pub3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Santolaya-Forgas J, Romero R, Espinoza J, et al. Prelabour rupture of the membranes. In: Reece EA, Hobbins JC, editors. Clinical obstetrics: the fetus & mother. 3. Malden, Massachusets: Blackwell; 2008. pp. 1130–1188. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Romero R, Dey SK, Fisher SJ. Preterm labor: one syndrome, many causes. Science. 2014;345:760–765. doi: 10.1126/science.1251816. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Ladfors L, Mattsson LA, Eriksson M, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for prelabor rupture of the membranes (PROM) at or near-term in an urban Swedish population. J Perinat Med. 2000;28:491–496. doi: 10.1515/JPM.2000.066. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Ismail AQ, Lahiri S. Management of prelabour rupture of membranes (PROM) at term. J Perinat Med. 2013;41:647–649. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2013-0078. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Grunebaum A. Reply to “Management of prelabour rupture of membranes (PROM) at term”. J Perinat Med. 2013;41:651–652. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2013-0127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Eschenbach D. Reply to: Ismail AQT, Lahiri S. Management of prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) at term. J Perinat Med. 2013;41:653–655. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2013-0167. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, et al. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet. 2008;371:75–84. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60074-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Daikoku NH, Kaltreider DF, Khouzami VA, et al. Premature rupture of membranes and spontaneous preterm labor: maternal endometritis risks. Obstet Gynecol. 1982;59:13–20. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Manuck TA, Maclean CC, Silver RM, et al. Preterm premature rupture of membranes: does the duration of latency influence perinatal outcomes? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201:414.e1–e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2009.07.045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Deutsch A, Deutsch E, Totten C, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes based on the gestational age of midtrimester preterm premature rupture of membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2010;23:1429–1434. doi: 10.3109/14767051003678069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gulati S, Agrawal S, Raghunandan C, et al. Maternal serum interleukin-6 and its association with clinicopathological infectious morbidity in preterm premature rupture of membranes: a prospective cohort study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25:1428–1432. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2011.638952. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Tsiartas P, Kacerovsky M, Musilova I, et al. The association between histological chorioamnionitis, funisitis and neonatal outcome in women with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26:1332–1336. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.784741. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Acaia B, Crovetto F, Ossola MW, et al. Predictive factors for neonatal survival in women with periviable preterm rupture of the membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26:1628–1634. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.794206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Manuck TA, Sheng X, Yoder BA, et al. Correlation between initial neonatal and early childhood outcomes following preterm birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:426.e1–e9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.046. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Manuck TA, Varner MW. Neonatal and early childhood outcomes following early vs later preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:308.e3–e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.05.030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Cotton DB, Hill LM, Strassner HT, et al. Use of amniocentesis in preterm gestation with ruptured membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 1984;63:38–43. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zlatnik FJ, Cruikshank DP, Petzold CR, et al. Amniocentesis in the identification of inapparent infection in preterm patients with premature rupture of the membranes. J Reprod Med. 1984;29:656–660. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Broekhuizen FF, Gilman M, Hamilton PR. Amniocentesis for gram stain and culture in preterm premature rupture of the membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;66:316–321. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Feinstein SJ, Vintzileos AM, Lodeiro JG, et al. Amniocentesis with premature rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 1986;68:147–152. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Romero R, Emamian M, Wan M, et al. The value of the leukocyte esterase test in diagnosing intra-amniotic infection. Am J Perinatol. 1988;5:64–69. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-999657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Dudley J, Malcolm G, Ellwood D. Amniocentesis in the management of preterm premature rupture of the membranes. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1991;31:331–336. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1991.tb02814.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Romero R, Yoon BH, Mazor M, et al. A comparative study of the diagnostic performance of amniotic fluid glucose, white blood cell count, interleukin-6, and gram stain in the detection of microbial invasion in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169:839–851. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90014-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Font GE, Gauthier DW, Meyer WJ, et al. Catalase activity as a predictor of amniotic fluid culture results in preterm labor or premature rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85:656–658. doi: 10.1016/0029-7844(95)00026-n. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Yoon BH, Jun JK, Park KH, et al. Serum C-reactive protein, white blood cell count, and amniotic fluid white blood cell count in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 1996;88:1034–1040. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(96)00339-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Blackwell SC, Berry SM. Role of amniocentesis for the diagnosis of subclinical intra-amniotic infection in preterm premature rupture of the membranes. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 1999;11:541–547. doi: 10.1097/00001703-199912000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Oh KJ, Lee KA, Sohn YK, et al. Intraamniotic infection with genital mycoplasmas exhibits a more intense inflammatory response than intraamniotic infection with other microorganisms in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203:211.e1–e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.03.035. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Cobo T, Palacio M, Martinez-Terron M, et al. Clinical and inflammatory markers in amniotic fluid as predictors of adverse outcomes in preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:126.e1–e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.03.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Kacerovsky M, Musilova I, Khatibi A, et al. Intraamniotic inflammatory response to bacteria: analysis of multiple amniotic fluid proteins in women with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25:2014–2019. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2012.671873. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Kacerovsky M, Cobo T, Andrys C, et al. The fetal inflammatory response in subgroups of women with preterm prelabor rupture of the membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26:795–801. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.765404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Kacerovsky M, Musilova I, Andrys C, et al. Prelabor rupture of membranes between 34 and 37 weeks: the intraamniotic inflammatory response and neonatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:325.e1–e10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.10.882. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.DiGiulio DB, Romero R, Kusanovic JP, et al. Prevalence and diversity of microbes in the amniotic fluid, the fetal inflammatory response, and pregnancy outcome in women with preterm pre-labor rupture of membranes. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2010;64:38–57. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0897.2010.00830.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Romero R, Miranda J, Chaemsaithong P, et al. Sterile and microbial-associated intra-amniotic inflammation in preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28:1394–1409. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.958463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Romero R, Quintero R, Oyarzun E, et al. Intraamniotic infection and the onset of labor in preterm premature rupture of the membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1988;159:661–666. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(88)80030-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Shim SS, Romero R, Hong JS, et al. Clinical significance of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:1339–1345. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.06.085. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Romero R, Miranda J, Chaiworapongsa T, et al. A novel molecular microbiologic technique for the rapid diagnosis of microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity and intra-amniotic infection in preterm labor with intact membranes. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2014;71:330–358. doi: 10.1111/aji.12189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Romero R, Miranda J, Chaiworapongsa T, et al. Prevalence and clinical significance of sterile intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm labor and intact membranes. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2014;72:458–474. doi: 10.1111/aji.12296. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Romero R, Miranda J, Chaiworapongsa T, et al. Sterile intra-amniotic inflammation in asymptomatic patients with a sonographic short cervix: prevalence and clinical significance. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Sep 24;:1–17. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.954243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Romero R, Yoon BH, Kenney JS, et al. Amniotic fluid interleukin-6 determinations are of diagnostic and prognostic value in preterm labor. Am J Reprod Immunol. 1993;30:167–183. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0897.1993.tb00618.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Coultrip LL, Lien JM, Gomez R, et al. The value of amniotic fluid interleukin-6 determination in patients with preterm labor and intact membranes in the detection of microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;171:901–911. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(94)70057-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Greci LS, Gilson GJ, Nevils B, et al. Is amniotic fluid analysis the key to preterm labor? A model using interleukin-6 for predicting rapid delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179:172–178. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(98)70269-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.El-Bastawissi AY, Williams MA, Riley DE, et al. Amniotic fluid interleukin-6 and preterm delivery: a review. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:1056–1064. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Yoon BH, Romero R, Moon JB, et al. Clinical significance of intra-amniotic inflammation in patients with preterm labor and intact membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:1130–1136. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.117680. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Wei SQ, Fraser W, Luo ZC. Inflammatory cytokines and spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic women: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:393–401. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e6dbc0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Conde-Agudelo A, Papageorghiou AT, Kennedy SH, et al. Novel biomarkers for the prediction of the spontaneous preterm birth phenotype: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2011;118:1042–1054. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02923.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Romero R, Kadar N, Miranda J, et al. The diagnostic performance of the Mass Restricted (MR) score in the identification of microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity or intra-amniotic inflammation is not superior to amniotic fluid interleukin-6. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:757–769. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.844123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Meem M, Modak JK, Mortuza R, et al. Biomarkers for diagnosis of neonatal infections: A systematic analysis of their potential as a point-of-care diagnostics. J Glob Health. 2011;1:201–209. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Batfalsky A, Lohr A, Heussen N, et al. Diagnostic value of an interleukin-6 bedside test in term and preterm neonates at the time of clinical suspicion of early- and late-onset bacterial infection. Neonatology. 2012;102:37–44. doi: 10.1159/000336632. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Schefold JC, Hasper D, von Haehling S, et al. Interleukin-6 serum level assessment using a new qualitative point-of-care test in sepsis: A comparison with ELISA measurements. Clin Biochem. 2008;41:893–898. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2008.03.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Dengler J, Schefold JC, Graetz D, et al. Point-of-care testing for interleukin-6 in cerebro spinal fluid (CSF) after subarachnoid haemorrhage. Med Sci Monit. 2008;14:BR265–268. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Chaemsaithong P, Romero R, Korzeniewski SJ, et al. A point of care test for the determination of amniotic fluid interleukin-6 and the chemokine CXCL-10/IP-10. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28:1510–1519. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.961417. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Chaemsaithong P, Romero R, Korzeniewski SJ, et al. A rapid interleukin-6 bedside test for the identification of intra-amniotic inflammation in preterm labor with intact membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29:349–359. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1006620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Vousden N, Chandiramani M, Seed P, et al. Interleukin-6 bedside testing in women at high risk of preterm birth. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24:1301–1304. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2011.558954. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Berthiaume M, Rousseau E, Rola-Pleszczynski M, et al. Rapid evaluation of the absence of inflammation after rupture of membranes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:865–869. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.829814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kacerovsky M, Musilova I, Hornychova H, et al. Bedside assessment of amniotic fluid interleukin-6 in preterm prelabor rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211:385.e1–e9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.03.069. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Gibbs RS, Blanco JD, St Clair PJ, et al. Quantitative bacteriology of amniotic fluid from women with clinical intraamniotic infection at term. J Infect Dis. 1982;145:1–8. doi: 10.1093/infdis/145.1.1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Hauth JC, Gilstrap LC, 3rd, Hankins GD, et al. Term maternal and neonatal complications of acute chorioamnionitis. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;66:59–62. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Gibbs RS, Dinsmoor MJ, Newton ER, et al. A randomized trial of intrapartum versus immediate postpartum treatment of women with intra-amniotic infection. Obstet Gynecol. 1988;72:823–828. doi: 10.1097/00006250-198812000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Redline RW, Heller D, Keating S, et al. Placental diagnostic criteria and clinical correlation--a workshop report. Placenta. 2005;26(Suppl A):S114–S117. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2005.02.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Redline RW. Inflammatory responses in the placenta and umbilical cord. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2006;11:296–301. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2006.02.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Pacora P, Chaiworapongsa T, Maymon E, et al. Funisitis and chorionic vasculitis: the histological counterpart of the fetal inflammatory response syndrome. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;11:18–25. doi: 10.1080/jmf.11.1.18.25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Yoon BH, Romero R, Shim JY, et al. C-reactive protein in umbilical cord blood: a simple and widely available clinical method to assess the risk of amniotic fluid infection and funisitis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;14:85–90. doi: 10.1080/jmf.14.2.85.90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Romero R, Sepulveda W, Kenney JS, et al. Interleukin 6 determination in the detection of microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity. Ciba Found Symp. 1992;167:205–220. doi: 10.1002/9780470514269.ch13. discussion 220–203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Andrews WW, Hauth JC, Goldenberg RL, et al. Amniotic fluid interleukin-6: correlation with upper genital tract microbial colonization and gestational age in women delivered after spontaneous labor versus indicated delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173:606–612. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90290-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Yoon BH, Romero R, Kim CJ, et al. Amniotic fluid interleukin-6: a sensitive test for antenatal diagnosis of acute inflammatory lesions of preterm placenta and prediction of perinatal morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:960–970. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(95)90028-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Yoon BH, Romero R, Jun JK, et al. Amniotic fluid cytokines (interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, interleukin-1 beta, and interleukin-8) and the risk for the development of bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177:825–830. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(97)70276-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.DiGiulio DB, Romero R, Amogan HP, et al. Microbial prevalence, diversity and abundance in amniotic fluid during preterm labor: a molecular and culture-based investigation. PLoS One. 2008;3:e3056. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003056. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Gervasi MT, Romero R, Bracalente G, et al. Midtrimester amniotic fluid concentrations of interleukin-6 and interferon-gamma-inducible protein-10: evidence for heterogeneity of intra-amniotic inflammation and associations with spontaneous early (<32 weeks) and late (>32 weeks) preterm delivery. J Perinat Med. 2012;40:329–343. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2012-0034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Lee SE, Romero R, Jung H, et al. The intensity of the fetal inflammatory response in intraamniotic inflammation with and without microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:294.e1–e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.07.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Combs CA, Gravett M, Garite TJ, et al. Amniotic fluid infection, inflammation, and colonization in preterm labor with intact membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:125.e1–e15. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.11.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Romero R, Miranda J, Kusanovic JP, et al. Clinical chorioamnionitis at term I: microbiology of the amniotic cavity using cultivation and molecular techniques. J Perinat Med. 2015;43:19–36. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2014-0249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Yoon BH, Romero R, Park JS, et al. Microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity with Ureaplasma urealyticum is associated with a robust host response in fetal, amniotic, and maternal compartments. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1998;179:1254–1260. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(98)70142-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Yoon BH, Romero R, Park JS, et al. The relationship among inflammatory lesions of the umbilical cord (funisitis), umbilical cord plasma interleukin 6 concentration, amniotic fluid infection, and neonatal sepsis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:1124–1129. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.109035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Hillier SL, Martius J, Krohn M, et al. A case-control study of chorioamnionic infection and histologic chorioamnionitis in prematurity. N Engl J Med. 1988;319:972–978. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198810133191503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Hillier SL, Krohn MA, Kiviat NB, et al. Microbiologic causes and neonatal outcomes associated with chorioamnion infection. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;165:955–961. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(91)90447-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Romero R, Salafia CM, Athanassiadis AP, et al. The relationship between acute inflammatory lesions of the preterm placenta and amniotic fluid microbiology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:1382–1388. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(92)91609-e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Arias F, Victoria A, Cho K, et al. Placental histology and clinical characteristics of patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:265–271. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(96)00451-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Redline RW, Wilson-Costello D, Borawski E, et al. Placental lesions associated with neurologic impairment and cerebral palsy in very low-birth-weight infants. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998;122:1091–1098. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Smulian JC, Vintzileos AM, Lai YL, et al. Maternal chorioamnionitis and umbilical vein interleukin-6 levels for identifying early neonatal sepsis. J Matern Fetal Med. 1999;8:88–94. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6661(199905/06)8:3<88::AID-MFM4>3.0.CO;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Redline RW, Wilson-Costello D, Borawski E, et al. The relationship between placental and other perinatal risk factors for neurologic impairment in very low birth weight children. Pediatr Res. 2000;47:721–726. doi: 10.1203/00006450-200006000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Dexter SC, Pinar H, Malee MP, et al. Outcome of very low birth weight infants with histopathologic chorioamnionitis. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96:172–177. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00886-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Elimian A, Verma U, Beneck D, et al. Histologic chorioamnionitis, antenatal steroids, and perinatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96:333–336. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)00928-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Wu YW, Colford JM., Jr Chorioamnionitis as a risk factor for cerebral palsy: A meta-analysis. JAMA. 2000;284:1417–1424. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.11.1417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Williams MC, O’Brien WF, Nelson RN, et al. Histologic chorioamnionitis is associated with fetal growth restriction in term and preterm infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:1094–1099. doi: 10.1067/mob.2000.108866. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Gaudet LM, Smith GN. Cerebral palsy and chorioamnionitis: the inflammatory cytokine link. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2001;56:433–436. doi: 10.1097/00006254-200107000-00023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Kim CJ, Yoon BH, Park SS, et al. Acute funisitis of preterm but not term placentas is associated with severe fetal inflammatory response. Hum Pathol. 2001;32:623–629. doi: 10.1053/hupa.2001.24992. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Kim CJ, Yoon BH, Romero R, et al. Umbilical arteritis and phlebitis mark different stages of the fetal inflammatory response. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:496–500. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.116689. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Holcroft CJ, Askin FB, Patra A, et al. Are histopathologic chorioamnionitis and funisitis associated with metabolic acidosis in the preterm fetus? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:2010–2015. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.05.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Choi CW, Kim BI, Park JD, et al. Risk factors for the different types of chronic lung diseases of prematurity according to the preceding respiratory distress syndrome. Pediatr Int. 2005;47:417–423. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-200x.2005.02081.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Dempsey E, Chen MF, Kokottis T, et al. Outcome of neonates less than 30 weeks gestation with histologic chorioamnionitis. Am J Perinatol. 2005;22:155–159. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-865020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Andrews WW, Goldenberg RL, Faye-Petersen O, et al. The Alabama Preterm Birth study: polymorphonuclear and mononuclear cell placental infiltrations, other markers of inflammation, and outcomes in 23- to 32-week preterm newborn infants. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;195:803–808. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.083. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Rocha G, Proenca E, Quintas C, et al. Chorioamnionitis and brain damage in the preterm newborn. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2007;20:745–749. doi: 10.1080/14767050701580515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Holzman C, Lin X, Senagore P, et al. Histologic chorioamnionitis and preterm delivery. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166:786–794. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Kallapur SG, Nitsos I, Moss TJ, et al. IL-1 mediates pulmonary and systemic inflammatory responses to chorioamnionitis induced by lipopolysaccharide. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2009;179:955–961. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200811-1728OC. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Park CW, Moon KC, Park JS, et al. The involvement of human amnion in histologic chorioamnionitis is an indicator that a fetal and an intra-amniotic inflammatory response is more likely and severe: clinical implications. Placenta. 2009;30:56–61. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2008.09.017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Menon R, Taylor RN, Fortunato SJ. Chorioamnionitis--a complex pathophysiologic syndrome. Placenta. 2010;31:113–120. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2009.11.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Hendson L, Russell L, Robertson CM, et al. Neonatal and neurodevelopmental outcomes of very low birth weight infants with histologic chorioamnionitis. J Pediatr. 2011;158:397–402. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2010.09.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Jobe AH. Effects of chorioamnionitis on the fetal lung. Clin Perinatol. 2012;39:441–457. doi: 10.1016/j.clp.2012.06.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Martinelli P, Sarno L, Maruotti GM, et al. Chorioamnionitis and prematurity: a critical review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(Suppl 4):29–31. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2012.714981. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Bersani I, Thomas W, Speer CP. Chorioamnionitis--the good or the evil for neonatal outcome? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(Suppl 1):12–16. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2012.663161. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Trevisanuto D, Peruzzetto C, Cavallin F, et al. Fetal placental inflammation is associated with poor neonatal growth of preterm infants: a case-control study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26:1484–1490. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.789849. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Kim SM, Romero R, Park JW, et al. The relationship between the intensity of intra-amniotic inflammation and the presence and severity of acute histologic chorioamnionitis in preterm gestation. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28:1500–1509. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.961009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Kallapur SG, Presicce P, Rueda CM, et al. Fetal immune response to chorioamnionitis. Semin Reprod Med. 2014;32:56–67. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1361823. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Arayici S, Kadioglu Simsek G, Oncel MY, et al. The effect of histological chorioamnionitis on the short-term outcome of preterm infants </=32 weeks: a single-center study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:1129–1133. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.850668. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Vedovato S, Lo Iacono A, Morando C, et al. Sensorineural hearing loss in very low birth weight infants with histological chorioamnionitis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2015;28:895–899. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2014.936375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Romero R, Mazor M, Wu YK, et al. Infection in the pathogenesis of preterm labor. Semin Perinatol. 1988;12:262–279. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Romero R, Mazor M. Infection and preterm labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1988;31:553–584. doi: 10.1097/00003081-198809000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Romero R, Avila C, Santhanam U, et al. Amniotic fluid interleukin 6 in preterm labor. Association with infection. J Clin Invest. 1990;85:1392–1400. doi: 10.1172/JCI114583. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Goncalves LF, Chaiworapongsa T, Romero R. Intrauterine infection and prematurity. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2002;8:3–13. doi: 10.1002/mrdd.10008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Yoon BH, Romero R, Moon J, et al. Differences in the fetal interleukin-6 response to microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity between term and preterm gestation. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;13:32–38. doi: 10.1080/jmf.13.1.32.38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Kim KW, Romero R, Park HS, et al. A rapid matrix metalloproteinase-8 bedside test for the detection of intraamniotic inflammation in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:292.e1–e5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.06.040. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES