Reduced fetal urine production rate-An early marker of fetal inflammatory response syndrome in preterm premature rupture of membranes: Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To find association between fetal urine production rate (FUPR) and fetal inflammatory response syndrome (FIRS) in preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 70 pregnant women with PPROM at 28-34 weeks of pregnancy was conducted. FUPR was calculated by performing serial fetal bladder volume measurements ultrasonographically and was repeated weekly until delivery. After delivery, cord blood interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels were measured. Placental tissue histopathology was performed and neonatal outcomes were noted. RESULTS: Out of 70 recruited patients with PPROM, 44 had evidence of FIRS (62.86%). Mean FUPR at the time of delivery was significantly reduced in neonates with evidence of FIRS compared with the Non-FIRS group (13.89 ± 8.06 ml/h vs. 25.89 ± 4.94 ml/h). Out of 41 patients with reduced FUPR, 39 neonates had FIRS whereas only five out of 29 neonates with normal FUPR had FIRS (P < 0.001). Severe neonatal morbidity was found in 24 out of 41 (58.54%) neonates with reduced FUPR prenatally. The occurrence of respiratory distress syndrome, necrotizing enterocolitis, and sepsis was significantly high in neonates with reduced FUPR. CONCLUSION: Reduced FUPR is strongly associated with FIRS in cases of PPROM and hence can be used as an early predictor of adverse neonatal outcomes.

Usefulness of fetal urine production measurement for prediction of perinatal outcomes in uteroplacental insufficiency.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether fetal urine production measurement is useful for predicting adverse outcomes in patients with uteroplacental insufficiency. METHODS: We enrolled patients with uteroplacental insufficiency at 24 to 40 weeks' gestation and normal pregnancies matched for gestational age and divided them into 3 groups according to perinatal outcomes: group 1 (n = 141), a control group of normal pregnancies; group 2 (n = 29), uteroplacental insufficiency without adverse outcomes; and group 3 (n = 18), uteroplacental insufficiency with adverse outcomes. An adverse outcome was defined as 1 or more of the following: (1) cesarean delivery because of fetal distress; (2) admission to the neonatal intensive care unit; (3) cord arterial pH less than 7.15 at birth; and (4) low 5-minute Apgar score (<7). The fetal urine production rate was obtained by serial bladder volume measurement using virtual organ computer-aided analysis. For bladder volume determination, we scanned the bladder in the 3-dimensional mode and defined the bladder surface contour in the reference plane, repeating the rotation of the reference plane with an angle of 30° and determining the surface contour on each plane. Statistical methods, including the Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher exact test, χ(2) test, and Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance, were used. RESULTS: Group 3 had a lower mean fetal urine production rate than groups 1 and 2, whereas the urine production rate was not different between groups 1 and 2 (group 1, 49.0 mL/h; group 2, 59.4 mL/h; group 3, 20.7 mL/h; P < .001 between groups 1 and 3 and between groups 2 and 3). This difference between groups 2 and 3 remained significant after adjusting for the amniotic fluid index, umbilical artery Doppler pulsatility index, and presence of fetal growth restriction. CONCLUSIONS: Uteroplacental insufficiency cases with adverse perinatal outcomes had a lower fetal urine production rate than those without adverse outcomes. This difference might be used to predict adverse perinatal outcomes in uteroplacental insufficiency.