Comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of the two rapid bedside immunoassays and combined clinical conventional diagnosis in prelabour rupture of membranes

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorAlbayrak, Mustafa
dc.contributor.authorÖzdemir, İsmail
dc.contributor.authorKoç, Önder
dc.contributor.authorAnkaralı, Handan
dc.contributor.authorÖzen, Orhan
dc.date.accessioned2020-04-30T22:41:27Z
dc.date.available2020-04-30T22:41:27Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.departmentDÜ, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümüen_US
dc.descriptionAnkarali, Handan Camdeviren/0000-0002-3613-0523en_US
dc.descriptionWOS: 000296301900010en_US
dc.descriptionPubMed: 21640465en_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: Diagnosis of prelabour rupture of membranes (PROM) may be challenging. Conventional diagnostic methods such as speculum examination, ferning pattern, and pH detection are not satisfactorily accurate. Two relatively new, commercially available rapid bedside immunoassay strip tests, for placental alpha microglobulin-1 (PAMG-1) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 (ILGFBP-1), are alleged to be more accurate. We compared the diagnostic efficacy of PAMG-1 and ILGFBP-1 immunoassay tests and combined conventional clinical diagnostic methods in PROM. Study design: 167 pregnant women with signs and/or symptoms of PROM were prospectively evaluated with a combination of conventional clinical tests including speculum examination, nitrazine, ferning pattern, and pooling, in addition to PAMG-1 and ILGFBP-1 immunoassays. Differences in sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of the diagnostic methods were compared. Results: Although the PAMG-1 assay was more accurate, the PAMG-1 immunoassay, ILGFBP-1 immunoassay, and combined conventional clinical diagnosis were, in fact, all highly accurate with no significant difference in sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, or accuracy. Conclusion: Both rapid bedside strip tests may be used in clinical practice with similar efficacy in diagnosing PROM, particularly as a backup when diagnosis is still in doubt following a combination of conventional diagnostic methods. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.04.041en_US
dc.identifier.endpage182en_US
dc.identifier.issn0301-2115
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.startpage179en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.04.041
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12684/3188
dc.identifier.volume158en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000296301900010en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ2en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Science Bven_US
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal Of Obstetrics & Gynecology And Reproductive Biologyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectPremature rupture of membranesen_US
dc.subjectPrelabour ruptures of membranesen_US
dc.subjectPAMG-1en_US
dc.subjectILGFBP-1en_US
dc.titleComparison of the diagnostic efficacy of the two rapid bedside immunoassays and combined clinical conventional diagnosis in prelabour rupture of membranesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim Yok
İsim:
3188.pdf
Boyut:
165.21 KB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Makale Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu