早产新生儿胃液分析支持羊膜腔在分娩开始前无菌的观点:一项回顾性队列研究

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Kyong-No Lee, Hyun Ji Choi, Ha Lim Shin, Hyeon Ji Kim, Jee Yoon Park, Young Hwa Jung, Kyung Joon Oh, Chang Won Choi
{"title":"早产新生儿胃液分析支持羊膜腔在分娩开始前无菌的观点:一项回顾性队列研究","authors":"Kyong-No Lee, Hyun Ji Choi, Ha Lim Shin, Hyeon Ji Kim, Jee Yoon Park, Young Hwa Jung, Kyung Joon Oh, Chang Won Choi","doi":"10.1515/jpm-2023-0123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives To compare the frequency of <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic>-positive gastric fluid (GF) cultures based on the cause and mode of delivery in preterm newborns. Methods This retrospective cohort study included women with a singleton pregnancy who delivered prematurely (between 23<jats:sup>+0</jats:sup> and 32<jats:sup>+0</jats:sup> weeks of gestation, n=464) at a single university hospital in South Korea. The newborns’ GF was obtained on the day of birth via nasogastric intubation. The frequency of <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. in GF cultures was measured and compared according to the cause and mode of delivery. Results <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. was detected in 20.3 % of the GF samples. The presence of <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. was significantly higher in the spontaneous preterm birth group than in the indicated preterm birth group (30.2 vs. 3.0 %; p&lt;0.001). Additionally, <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. was more frequently found in the vaginal delivery group than in the cesarean delivery group, irrespective of the cause of preterm delivery [indicated preterm birth group (22.2 vs. 1.9 %, p=0.023); spontaneous preterm birth group (37.7 vs. 24.2 %, p=0.015)]. Conclusions <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. were found in 20.3 % of the GFs. However, only 1.9 % of newborns in the indicated preterm birth group with cesarean delivery had a <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic>-positive GF culture.","PeriodicalId":16704,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Perinatal Medicine","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of gastric fluid in preterm newborns supports the view that the amniotic cavity is sterile before the onset of parturition: a retrospective cohort study\",\"authors\":\"Kyong-No Lee, Hyun Ji Choi, Ha Lim Shin, Hyeon Ji Kim, Jee Yoon Park, Young Hwa Jung, Kyung Joon Oh, Chang Won Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/jpm-2023-0123\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives To compare the frequency of <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic>-positive gastric fluid (GF) cultures based on the cause and mode of delivery in preterm newborns. Methods This retrospective cohort study included women with a singleton pregnancy who delivered prematurely (between 23<jats:sup>+0</jats:sup> and 32<jats:sup>+0</jats:sup> weeks of gestation, n=464) at a single university hospital in South Korea. The newborns’ GF was obtained on the day of birth via nasogastric intubation. The frequency of <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. in GF cultures was measured and compared according to the cause and mode of delivery. Results <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. was detected in 20.3 % of the GF samples. The presence of <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. was significantly higher in the spontaneous preterm birth group than in the indicated preterm birth group (30.2 vs. 3.0 %; p&lt;0.001). Additionally, <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. was more frequently found in the vaginal delivery group than in the cesarean delivery group, irrespective of the cause of preterm delivery [indicated preterm birth group (22.2 vs. 1.9 %, p=0.023); spontaneous preterm birth group (37.7 vs. 24.2 %, p=0.015)]. Conclusions <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic> spp. were found in 20.3 % of the GFs. However, only 1.9 % of newborns in the indicated preterm birth group with cesarean delivery had a <jats:italic>Ureaplasma</jats:italic>-positive GF culture.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16704,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Perinatal Medicine\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Perinatal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2023-0123\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Perinatal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jpm-2023-0123","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 根据早产新生儿的原因和分娩方式,比较尿解支原体阳性胃液(GF)培养的频率。方法 该回顾性队列研究包括在韩国一家大学医院分娩的单胎妊娠早产儿(妊娠 23+0 周至 32+0 周,n=464)。新生儿的 GF 是在出生当天通过鼻胃插管获得的。根据分娩原因和分娩方式,测量并比较了 GF 培养物中解脲支原体的频率。结果 在 20.3% 的 GF 样品中检测到了解脲支原体。自然早产组中的解脲支原体含量明显高于指征早产组(30.2% 对 3.0%;p<0.001)。此外,无论早产原因如何,阴道分娩组比剖宫产组更常发现解脲支原体[指示性早产组(22.2% vs. 1.9%,p=0.023);自然早产组(37.7% vs. 24.2%,p=0.015)]。结论 20.3%的 GF 发现了解脲支原体。然而,在有指征的剖宫产早产组中,仅有 1.9% 的新生儿在 GF 培养中发现解脲脲原体阳性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of gastric fluid in preterm newborns supports the view that the amniotic cavity is sterile before the onset of parturition: a retrospective cohort study
Objectives To compare the frequency of Ureaplasma-positive gastric fluid (GF) cultures based on the cause and mode of delivery in preterm newborns. Methods This retrospective cohort study included women with a singleton pregnancy who delivered prematurely (between 23+0 and 32+0 weeks of gestation, n=464) at a single university hospital in South Korea. The newborns’ GF was obtained on the day of birth via nasogastric intubation. The frequency of Ureaplasma spp. in GF cultures was measured and compared according to the cause and mode of delivery. Results Ureaplasma spp. was detected in 20.3 % of the GF samples. The presence of Ureaplasma spp. was significantly higher in the spontaneous preterm birth group than in the indicated preterm birth group (30.2 vs. 3.0 %; p<0.001). Additionally, Ureaplasma spp. was more frequently found in the vaginal delivery group than in the cesarean delivery group, irrespective of the cause of preterm delivery [indicated preterm birth group (22.2 vs. 1.9 %, p=0.023); spontaneous preterm birth group (37.7 vs. 24.2 %, p=0.015)]. Conclusions Ureaplasma spp. were found in 20.3 % of the GFs. However, only 1.9 % of newborns in the indicated preterm birth group with cesarean delivery had a Ureaplasma-positive GF culture.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Perinatal Medicine
Journal of Perinatal Medicine 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
183
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Perinatal Medicine (JPM) is a truly international forum covering the entire field of perinatal medicine. It is an essential news source for all those obstetricians, neonatologists, perinatologists and allied health professionals who wish to keep abreast of progress in perinatal and related research. Ahead-of-print publishing ensures fastest possible knowledge transfer. The Journal provides statements on themes of topical interest as well as information and different views on controversial topics. It also informs about the academic, organisational and political aims and objectives of the World Association of Perinatal Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信